Obama Repeals 5th Amendment
*please go to page 7 if this is not new to you.*
Government calls for inventory of all weopans at V.F.W. Posts including old muskets swords tanks and everything from WWII and Vietnam.
Link to source. www.infowars.com check front page to link to article
0
-
To quote a line from "The Wild, Wild West"...
LET THE PARTY BEGIN!!!!!!!!!!![:D]0 -
Preparing for Martial Law: International Swine Flu Conference to Be Held in Washington
Source: infowars
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
August 6, 2009
On his show today, Alex Jones read an email sent by a listener. "I work at the National Institutes of Health and we received an email about the upcoming International Swine Flu Conference that will be occurring in Washington, D.C. Aug 19 - Aug 21, 2009," the listener writes. "They're talking about mass fatality management and continuity of government. They're going to hit us with a massive biological false flag attack."
The email contains a PDF attachment of a brochure for the Swine Flu Conference. Breakout sessions detailed on the brochure include discussions on mass fatality planning, business continuity planning, and COOP or Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government Planning. Additional sessions cover enforced quarantines, mass vaccinations, and how to "control and diffuse social unrest and public disorder." The brochure is also available for download on the International Swine Flu Conference website sponsored by ISFC New-Fields Exhibitions.
"Top leaders and key decision-makers of major companies representing a broad range of industries will meet with distinguished scientists, public health officials, law enforcers, first responders, and other experts to discuss pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery at the 1st International Swine Flu Conference," the website announces.
The conference is further evidence the government plans to launched a false flag attack under the cover of an engineered H1N1 flu pandemic and impose martial law.
Prison Planet and Infowars have covered the story of a manufactured flu pandemic in detail, including:
On July 25, the Los Angeles Times reported the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expects the flu pandemic expected this autumn to kill hundreds of thousands. "The number of potential deaths is much higher than that usually seen in seasonal flu, which kills an estimated 36,000 Americans a year, and is even higher than the nation's most recent pandemic." The 1957 pandemic of Asian flu killed 70,000. The 1918 Spanish Flu claimed between 500,000 to 675,000 lives in the United States.
The CDC has announced that it will no longer keep track of the number of people killed by the virus. "Health officials from the CDC said the virus was too widespread to continue counting," the Digital Journal reported. "Health experts say millions have likely been infected worldwide."
The U.S. government has bought 195 million doses of H1N1 swine flu vaccine for a possible autumn vaccination campaign, a U.S. federal official told Reuters on July 23. The U.S. Health and Human Services Department has also contracted for 120 million doses of adjuvant, a compound to stretch the number of doses of vaccine.
In late 2007, the Bush administration issued a "directive" establishing a "National Strategy for Public Health and Medical Preparedness" based on Biodefense for the 21st Century. Prior to this, in May of 2007, the U.S. military had the foresight to "plan for a possible avian flu pandemic that could kill as many as three million people in the United States in as little as six weeks," according to Yahoo News. Guidelines and "planning assumptions for US military services and combatant commands" were published in a document entitled "Implementation Plan for Pandemic Influenza."
"Possible scenarios include US troops being called in to put down riots, guard pharmaceutical plants and shipments, and help restrict the movement of people inside the country and across its borders," Yahoo summarizes. "The plan envisions fast moving, catastrophic waves of disease that would overwhelm health facilities and cripple the ability of state and local authorities to provide even basic commodities or services."
The "hidden agenda consists in using the threat of a pandemic and/or the plight of a natural disaster as a pretext to establish military rule" and "suspend Constitutional government and allow the Military to intervene in civilian affairs in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act," author Michel Chossudovsky wrote in 2005.
..................................................................... To see the original e-mail click on the source link. Steve0 -
Obama's Imperial Decree: Target Oklahoma
Source: tenth amendment center
Bryce Shonka
Tenth Amendment Center
August 7, 2009
Remember the good old days, when one only had to watch out for the Federal Government's twisted interpretation of the commerce clause to justify tyranny?
Well those days seem to be long gone. The Obama Administration has been employing an old tactic lately - what some might call an imperial threat - and they're not doing it overseas, either.
STATES UNDER THREAT
The state of Oklahoma is now the target of a direct challenge from US Attorney General Eric Holder, who is using the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as justification to violate Oklahoma's sovereignty as affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.
In a letter written to the State Attorney General in April, the Federal government used aggressive language, bringing up the possibility of withholding Federal funds appropriated for Oklahoma. The reason? A proposed amendment to the State Constitution, which requires voter approval, that would make English the official language of the State.
"What it indicates is the Federal Government's contempt for the states, in this case Oklahoma, and for the idea of federal - as opposed to national - government. AG Holder believes that Oklahoma is an administrative subdivision of the USA, and that it is perfectly right for him to coerce Oklahomans to do his will. Who cares whether he has ever been to Oklahoma, met an Oklahoman, or thought about Oklahoma?" said Kevin Gutzman, an American historian and New York Times bestselling author.
Oklahoma is not alone as a state challenged by central authority in recent months. Recently, federal firearms licensees in Tennessee and Montana received a letter from another Federal agency, the ATF, who had also issued a decree wrought with hubris - claims by the Federal government of their legal supremacy across the land.
DESTROYING LOCAL GOVERNMENT
"Both of these letters, particularly this letter to the Attorney General of Oklahoma, are very officious," observed Rob Natelson, professor of law at the University of Montana. "It reminds one eerily of the kinds of communications that started to come out from the Emperor to the local cities of the Roman Empire, beginning the course of the ultimate destruction of local government."
Professor Natelson is a widely-recognized expert on the framing and adoption of the United States Constitution, and on several occasions, he has been the first to uncover key background facts about the Constitution's meaning. I knew this before our conversation. What I didn't know, however, was that he's also been studying Roman Law and history for the past 50 years, and is responsible for several works in that field.
"During the 2nd century AD, the Roman Emperors began increasingly to interfere with local government and they did this with.letters.letters that look something like this," continued Natelson, indicating the letter from Holder to Oklahoma. "They started out as almost advisory and they got increasingly peremptory. By the end of the 2nd century, there was very little local government left. You had very few people, therefore, willing to participate in local elections; very little patriotic spirit towards one's own province or city. And this was the harbinger for the ultimate centralization of the Roman Empire."
He continued with a strong, decisive tone, "Almost everyone who's studied in that area agrees that the effect was to sap the life out of the empire, so that everything flowed to the center. All that counted was the Emperor and his bureaucrats.and his courtiers. I look at this and I see this letter which gets close to looking like an order from the central government down to a sovereign state legislature, and I say.WOW. This looks like something that Septimius Severus would have sent to the local officials."
In Columbus, Ohio last weekend, a rally in support of State Sovereignty drew around 7,000 people. Judge Andrew Napolitano addressed the rally and made similar comments indicating the nature of our current point in US history.
"In the long history of the world, very few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its maximum hour of danger. This is that moment and you are that generation"
IMPERIALISM AND DECLINE
Are these men `crying wolf'?
"Some people might think that's a far fetched analogy but I can't emphasize enough how important this development is seen by historians. When people think of the collapse of the Roman Empire they think of the fall of Rome in 476 AD. The conversion of Rome from a relatively free state - almost a Federation - into a totalitarian state, really picked up speed and accelerated during the 2nd century [AD], with this increasing intermeddling by the central authorities in local state government. That's what it reminded me of," recalled Natelson.
"[The DOJ] are not violating any law by sending these letters, but there's a change in tone, there's a new and disturbing tone in them. At least the ATF letter was addressed to individuals. This one is addressed to a state legislature - really, it's a bit much. Besides the fact that there's the tone, there's the fact that they sent the letters at all. Most of the letters that were sent out by the emperor were called rescripts, and that's almost what [the letter from Holder] looks like. The one difference is that a rescript was usually a reply to a request for advice. In some ways this is worse than a rescript because this is unsolicited. A better way to compare it would be to an imperial constitutio - an imperial decision or decree." Natelson added.
His Roman analogy is worth considering, for several reasons. Rome may have ended up a brutal dictatorship, but it began through a series of treaties between regions, and in some ways parallels present day America.
"When you draw comparisons between the U.S. and ancient Rome, you have to be very cautious, though Rome does have lessons to offer us and the history and results of the relentless centralization of the Empire is one of them," Natelson continued.
THE OTHER WAY AROUND
If there's a case to be made that the US is headed for the same sort of central plan that sucks the life out of a Republic, it would be difficult to imagine who in the United States could be encouraged by such a trend, outside of DC's beltway.
"Certainly state legislators in Oklahoma and congressmen from Oklahoma should put the Federal Government on notice that they will support a substantial reduction in the budget for Holder's portion of the federal bureaucracy so long as he is trying to coerce them in this way." recommended Gutzman.
Worldwide trends in recent political elections do exhibit signs of a move away from central planner candidates, a trend the United States has been contrary to for nearly a decade, but perhaps the pendulum has reversed itself.
"As the economy grows increasingly complicated, increasingly interdependent and increasingly technological, centralized control (which never worked very well) works less and less, and people are less willing to stand for it. This reflects a visceral gut reaction people have against centralized control, because they know from their own life it makes no sense, though it always takes time for those mega-trends to filter into the political class," Natelson continued. "Eventually, when a mule gets hit over the head enough times it figures out what's going on, and eventually the politicians will figure out what's going on, too."
People in the US are coming together by the thousands, demanding decentralization and nullification of Federal powers. Never before have the political elites had to contend with a non-partisan political force on such a massive scale. A storm seems to be brewing; a maelstrom of everyday Americans rallying around the document designed to keep the government in fear of the people - instead of the other way around.0 -
Government Permission Will be Required to Travel
Source: Campaign for Liberty
Authors: Micheal Ostrolenk, Robert E. Smith, Richard Sobel and Jan Towe
Campaign for Liberty
August 19, 2009
Starting this year, Americans will have to get government approval to travel by air. As Privacy Journal revealed last fall, henceforth "Permission Now Needed to Travel Within U.S." Getting a reservation and checking-in for air travel will soon require Transportation Security Administration authorization. That permission is by no means assured: For example, if your name matches a "no-fly" list, even mistakenly, you can be denied the right to a reserve a seat on a flight. If your name is on a "selectee" list, you and your possessions will be searched more thoroughly before you can board. What is going on here?
All travelers will need government OK in order to board a flight, or take a cruise. What the government can allow one day, it can forbid the next.
Protecting air safety is essential, but professional screening at airports already provides for it. Giving the TSA as an official agency the additional authority to decide who gets to go where reaches beyond safety into overextended governmental power. This newly minted "Secure Flight" rule fundamentally imbalances long-standing citizens' rights both to travel and to be left alone. If your name appears among hundreds of thousands on "watchlists," you assert that the government should not require ID to fly, you don't want to reveal your date of birth for concern about identity theft, or you don't choose to declare your gender, you can stay home.
By combining the requirement for government photo IDs in order to fly with checking government watchlists including potentially every passenger, "Secure Flight" puts the federal government into the business of licensing travel. All travelers will need government OK in order to board a flight, or take a cruise. What the government can allow one day, it can forbid the next. All things considered, isn't this a higher-tech and later-day version of South African domestic passports or eastern European checkpoints? In fact, because of the high technological capacity of the U.S. version, aren't its implications for travel control of plane, train, bus and subway travel much more far reaching? It's incredible that something like this is happening relatively unrecognized in America.
While some people consider the requirement to show ID or reveal a birth date a small trade-off for security, what is at stake here is the right to travel. That fundamental freedom of movement appears in the Articles of Confederation in the right to freely enter and leave all the states of the then small union. It was so fundamentally a part of American citizenship that the privileges and immunities clauses of the Constitution included it without explicitly mentioning it again for the more perfect union. With a large and expansive nation now ranging from Hawaii and Alaska to Washington DC, that right to travel nationally, and petition the distant government, is even more fundamental. Yet some courts maintain that if you can walk, you don't need the right to fly. People have the right to walk around freely without carrying a national ID; why do they have to show one to travel? The Supreme Court has yet to rule on the scope of the right to travel but lower courts have tended to restrict it more narrowly than the Founding Fathers would approve.
Clearly, the air ID and "Secure Flight" rules mean you cannot travel any distance reachable only by air without official permission. Moreover, the system can easily be extended to Amtrak as a government railroad, which already requires government ID in order to purchase a ticket. It can further be extended to urban rapid-transit networks tied to travel cards, and private inter-city buses requiring IDs to buy tickets or board coaches. These are the bases for an internal passport system in the U.S.
There are a lot of practical issues here too. The assumption that any "no-fly" list includes all potential wrong doers is implausible, and first time criminals would by definition not appear until it's too late. Many people on these lists are there because their names are similar to those who are suspect for other reasons. There are perhaps a few hundred people whose past activities merit keeping them off the streets, let alone flights; the small group is better caught through search warrants and good police work before they come to the airport. To demand that 750 million annual passengers have to get government permissions to fly creates a needle in-a-haystack approach to locating a few potential wrongdoers (none so far have been caught by the matching). "Secure Flight" is simply an ineffective use of scarce resources that sweeps much too broadly over people's most basic rights to travel and be let alone.
What can you do? Like other regulations quickly promulgated at the end of an outgoing administration, these rules need to be delayed and reconstituted. Contact your Senators, Representatives and the White House to suspend such ill-considered regulations now. Insist that the government create a system that makes flying safe without granting federal officials the final say over permission for citizens to travel. Otherwise, the traveling public may be detoured onto a perilous downhill road to being permanently grounded.0 -
Jail time and $1000/day fine for refusing swine flu vaccine.
source: examiner.com
Follow the link for the short news clip. Legislators voted 20-28 in Mass. to impose unreal fines if "emergency" occurs.
*I got the vote wrong on this, in a later article it was voted in unanimously*0 -
quote:Originally posted by steveaustin
Jail time and $1000/day fine for refusing swine flu vaccine.
source: examiner.com
Follow the link for the short news clip. Legislators voted 20-28 in Mass. to impose unreal fines if "emergency" occurs.
Collectivism leads inevitably to totalitarianism.
And so it continues......0 -
Pittsburgh Officials Mull Assault Weapons ban for G-20
Source: knka.com
City council members are expected to consider a proposed assault weapons ban today during a special session on the G-20 SummitPITTSBURGH (KDKA)
As the G-20 Summit nears, Pittsburgh City Council is considering the possibility of instituting an assault weapons ban during the high-profile event.
According to our news partners at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, city officials are talking about reviving an old law that would ban those types of weapons.
If approved, the ban would likely be in effect until after the G-20 Summit ends.
City council members are expected to consider the assault weapons ban today along with many other pieces of legislation during a special session on the G-20 Summit.
Officials have been meeting nearly everyday to make plans for the summit that will bring thousands of people to the city on September 24th and 25th.0 -
H.R 645
Source: govtrack
A BILL
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `National Emergency Centers Establishment Act'.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure--
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be--
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
This Act does not affect--
(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or
(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the following definitions apply:
(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `closed military installation' means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:
(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.
(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.
(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.
(2) EMERGENCY- The term `emergency' has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term `major disaster' has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `military installation' has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
Fema camps sound all warm and fuzzy. Wonder what they're serving for dinner.0 -
Bill would give president emergency control of Internet
Source: cnet.com
by Declan McCullagh
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.
They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.
"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness," said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill."
Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.
A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.
When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs--from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records," Rockefeller said.
The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government's role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.
Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.
The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. "As soon as you're saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it's going to be a really big issue," he says.
Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. ("Cyber" is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)
"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."
Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
The Internet Security Alliance's Clinton adds that his group is "supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective."
Update at 3:14 p.m. PDT: I just talked to Jena Longo, deputy communications director for the Senate Commerce committee, on the phone. She sent me e-mail with this statement:
The president of the United States has always had the constitutional authority, and duty, to protect the American people and direct the national response to any emergency that threatens the security and safety of the United States. The Rockefeller-Snowe Cybersecurity bill makes it clear that the president's authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack. The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster. This particular legislative language is based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks. To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a "government shutdown or takeover of the Internet" and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false. The purpose of this language is to clarify how the president directs the public-private response to a crisis, secure our economy and safeguard our financial networks, protect the American people, their privacy and civil liberties, and coordinate the government's response.
Unfortunately, I'm still waiting for an on-the-record answer to these four questions that I asked her colleague on Wednesday. I'll let you know if and when I get a response.0 -
Editorial: False reports about guns
Source: washingtontimes.com
Many media outlets have misfired about guns. Countless newspapers and television networks -- from CBS to MSNBC -- have misreported that conservative protesters are threatening President Obama with guns at public events. It hasn't happened.
In Portsmouth, N.H., a man carrying a gun, William Kostric, joined an Aug. 11 health care protest. This was blocks away and hours before Mr. Obama's town-hall meeting in that city. Mr. Kostric was given permission to be on church property where the protest occurred and was not at the place the president visited. What most of the coverage left out was that Mr. Kostric didn't carry his gun only for the protest; he legally carries a gun with him all the time for protection.
While the media regularly used terms such as "hotheads" to mischaracterize the situation, the coverage ignored that union members who opposed the protest had attacked Mr. Kostric and a friend, kicking, pushing and spitting on them. Despite violence against him by Mr. Obama's supporters, Mr. Kostric did not draw his gun or threaten anyone.
On the CBS Evening News, Katie Couric asked, "Are we really still debating health care when a man brings a handgun to a church where the president is speaking?" Deliberately or not, she got the facts wrong. As we know, Mr. Kostric did bring a gun to the church, but the president was not there and never was scheduled to speak there. Mr. Obama spoke at a separate event at a local high school at a different time. Not letting facts get in the way of her hysterical story line, Ms. Couric linked Mr. Kostric's gun to "fear and frankly ignorance drown[ing] out the serious debate that needs to take place about an issue that affects the lives of millions of people."
In another case in Arizona, a black man staged an event with a local radio host and carried a semiautomatic rifle a few blocks away from another Obama town-hall meeting. According to the radio station, the staged event was "partially motivated to do so because of the controversy surrounding William Kostric." This occurrence was not an example of an outraged gun-toting Obama protester, but a stunt to garner attention for a shock jock. Of course, this inconvenient truth was ignored by most news outlets.
MSNBC misrepresented the facts to try to back up a bogus claim about racism being behind opposition to Mr. Obama's agenda. On Donny Deutsch's Aug. 18 show about the Arizona town-hall meeting, the producers aired a clip of the anonymous black man carrying the so-called assault rifle -- but the network edited the tape so the man's race was obscured. Truth be damned, MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer said, "There are questions whether this has a racial overtone. I mean, here you have a man of color in the presidency and white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists." Another commentator on the same show worried about the "anger about a black person being president." The supposed result: "You know we see these hate groups rising up."
MSNBC's irresponsible behavior is more than just bad journalism; it sows distrust between races. Ernest Hancock, the radio host who staged the event, was hoping to get some free publicity for himself and his show. Whatever one thinks of this PR stunt, it had nothing to do with race. MSNBC misrepresented a black man carrying a gun as a white man to invent a racial dynamic that didn't exist.
Media disinformation about guns is a sad sign of the drastic action liberals will take to undermine support for gun rights for law-abiding citizens. It's also an indication of liberals' extreme desperation as Mr. Obama's agenda unravels.0 -
Follow up article on the $1000 a day fine + jail time link.
Source: thenewamerican.com
Mass. Health Bill Would Allow Warrnetless Arrests, Quarintine
Article by Alex Newman
A pandemic and disaster preparation bill (S. 2028) passed unanimously by the Massachusetts Senate earlier this year is receiving wide-spread criticism as citizens mobilize to oppose its passage in the commonwealth's House of Representatives.
"Under this bill, Massachusetts becomes a medical police state. There is no debating it," wrote Natural News editor Michael Adams in an August 28 article entitled "Wake Up, America: Forced vaccinations, quarantine camps, health care interrogations and mandatory 'decontaminations,'" where he suggested America was delving into medical fascism. "The citizens of Massachusetts will have no rights, period. The Constitution is ancient history. You are now the property of the State."
The bill contains a number of controversial, alarming, and blatantly unconstitutional provisions. Under an emergency declared by the governor, the statute purports to give the health commissioner, and law enforcement and medical personnel broad authority to mobilize forces, vaccinate the population, enter private property with no warrants, and even quarantine people against their will.
The legislation provides severe penalties - $1,000 fine per day and possible jail time - for not complying with state orders, while also claiming to shield everyone involved from liability. It gives local health authorities the power "to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons" and gives government agents the authority to "arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated an order" while using "reasonable diligence to enforce such order." Also, law-enforcement authorities "shall assist" medical personnel in the "involuntary transportation" of people to "treatment centers."
The provision on vaccines does give citizens the authority to refuse the vaccination, but people who do can be "isolated or quarantined." The same fate awaits those are "unable or unwilling to submit to decontamination or procedures necessary for diagnosis." One part of the legislation requires that owners or occupiers of a property "permit entry into and investigation of the premises," and another section creates price controls.
Draconian measures like this to supposedly deal with pandemics and outbreaks of disease are getting a boost with the hysteria surrounding swine flu, but critics are warning of the dangers of such tactics and fighting back. "In this time of fear, we can't let that fear take away our freedom to make voluntary health decisions," said Barbara Loe Fisher, the president of the National Vaccine Information Center. She offered a chilling analysis of the legislation in Massachusetts and the national situation, saying "it looks like few choices will be allowed." But she encouraged people to find out what their rights are.
Though it breezed past the Senate with a 36 to 0 vote, the Massachusetts bill is still languishing in the House after being referred to the committee on health care financing. "One of the reasons the bill is stalled in the house is because those house reps are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents saying, `I will refuse the vaccine,'" explained writer Devvy Kidd in a piece about important bills to defeat where she said the reaction to this legislation may have been blown out of proportion.
But while opposition to the plan may be mounting, there are many in power who believe - like Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel - that the government shouldn't let "crises" go to "waste." This bill has been debated in the Massachusetts legislature before, but the House and Senate could never agree on a final version. So some lawmakers are using concern over the swine flu outbreak as a tool for pushing their agenda and getting it passed this time around.
"It's too bad that we have to have something like that pending to get us to finally act," said Democratic Massachusetts Senator Richard Moore in a televised interview, referring to the spread of the H1N1 virus. "This was actually on the calendar before that became a news story," he explained, but "it does give us another reason why it's a good idea to have this one the books." If the House passes it, a veto by the governor will likely be the last thing that could stop it.
Unfortunately, people hoping that the judicial branch will step in and restore some sanity may be left wanting. "Judges will not stand in the way of emergency actions taken to protect the public from a clear and present danger, and if they do, the state appeals court will over turn their rulings in a matter of hours," explained a piece written by Louisiana State University director of the program in law, science and public health Edward Richards and Dr. Katherine
Rathbun. "The history of judicial restraint on emergency powers is one of blind obedience to civil and military authority."
A great deal of tyrannical federal statutes dealing with health emergencies already exist, and some other states are considering vast power grabs of their own. Maine recently had its National Guard engaging in swine flu vaccine scenario drills at a school while the military draws up plans to help FEMA with the swine flu situation across the country.
But it is past time for citizens to demand that their leaders respect the people's medical freedom and individual rights. Massachusetts should kill this bill and other states should fight to preserve the liberty of their citizens. Government officials at all levels should finally obey their oaths to the Constitution and the bill of rights, especially in the life-and-death field of healthcare.0 -
U.S. Military Receives Order for Mandatory Vaccination
Source: infowars
Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
September 3, 2009
All military personnel will be vaccinated against the H1N1 flu virus, and the vaccine will be available to all military family members who want it, a Defense Department health affairs official said today.
The H1N1 vaccination program will begin in early October, said Army Lt. Col. (Dr.) Wayne Hachey, director of preventive medicine for Defense Department health affairs.
The vaccine, which has been licensed by the Food and Drug Administration, will be mandatory for uniformed personnel, Hachey said. "What we want to do is target those people who are at highest risk for transmission," he said.
Health-care workers, deploying troops, those serving on ships and submarines, and new accessions are at the top of the list. "Any place where we take a lot of people, squash them all together and get them nice and close and put them under stressful conditions will get the vaccine first," he said.
The department will use the usual seasonal flu vaccine distribution chain for the H1N1, Hachey said, noting that while the mass H1N1 vaccinations are new to the general population, the process for vaccinating against seasonal flu is old hat for the Defense Department. "We've been doing this for decades," he said. "The system is tried and true."
The department initially will receive 1 million doses of the H1N1 vaccine, and another 1.7 million doses later in October.
Officials don't know yet whether people will need one dose or two, Hachey said. "The assumption right now is that people will need two doses, 21 days apart," he said. "That may change."
FDA officials still are studying H1N1 and the vaccine, and the results should be known by the end of the month.
Seasonal flu vaccine already is available, and the Defense Department will begin giving those shots shortly, Hachey said. "That has been our message to immunizers: to try and get as many people as they can immunized against the seasonal flu early," he said.
Guidelines for giving priority to family members will follow those for the general population, Hachey said. The Department of Health and Human Services is buying millions of doses of the vaccine.
"Installations are going to register with each state as an immunizer," Hachey said. "They will tell how many people they care for. This includes dependents, retirees and so on."
The Centers for Disease Control will place the order and will ship the vaccine where needed. Family members will have multiple opportunities to get the vaccine, whether at Defense Department medical facilities or off post, Hachey said.
The CDC has established target groups for those at greatest risk for transmitting or being affected by the H1N1. They include pregnant women, health-care workers, those younger than 25 or older than 65, and those with pre-existing health conditions.
Hachey said previous plans are serving the Defense Department well. "We have been preparing for pandemic flu because of its potential impact on the mission," he said.
The symptoms of the H1N1 flu are almost the same as the seasonal flu: fever, sore throat, runny nose, nausea, muscle aches and feeling rundown. The 2009 H1N1 virus - formerly known as swine flu - is a pandemic virus, according to the World Health Organization. U.S. officials call the virus "troubling" and urge communities across the United States to take actions to mitigate the effects of it. The federal government is urging states and municipalities to begin preparing now for the fall flu season.
President Barack Obama addressed the H1N1 pandemic following a White House meeting today.
"As I said when we saw the first cases of this virus back in the spring, I don't want anybody to be alarmed, but I do want everybody to be prepared," he said. "We know that we usually get a second, larger wave of these flu viruses in the fall, and so response plans have been put in place across all levels of government."
But government cannot do it all, and the American people have a responsibility to stop the spread of the disease, Obama said. "We need families and businesses to ensure that they have plans in place if a family member, a child or a co-worker contracts the flu and needs to stay home," he said.
"And most importantly, we need everyone to get informed about individual risk factors, and we need everyone to take the common-sense steps that we know can make a difference," the president said. "Stay home if you're sick. Wash your hands frequently. Cover your sneezes with your sleeve, not your hands. And take all the necessary precautions to stay healthy. I know it sounds simple, but it's important and it works."
The H1N1 is a never-before-seen combination of human, swine and avian flu viruses, officials said. First detected in Mexico in February, it quickly spread around the world. According to July WHO statistics, there have been 94,512 H1N1 cases worldwide, and 429 people have died from it. In the United States, 33,902 contracted H1N1, and 170 have died.0 -
250th post giveaway. I thought I would put this in here for those who read the other articles that I find relevant to our fight. It's not much but I cleaned out my reloading bench and found 18 300 win mag once fired that I won't use. Headstamp w-w super 300 win mag. If you or someone you know can use these enter and I'll let my dog pick a winner. After the short contest I will delete this post and would ask you to do the same. I am thinking about scaling back the front page so you won't have to go to the second to read new material. Please copy or print any article that you found relevant.
Thanks and good luck
the other steve [8D]0 -
I do not have a 300 win mag, so I can't use them.
Hope someone who reads this will, or knows someone that can.0 -
thanks for the giveaway but i cant use em. i read all these articles so keep em comin! 0 -
Likewise, I can't use them. Thanks tho. Should you choose to give away your bionic eye, I could use it. 0 -
Well, I thought it might make for an easy give away. I'll leave it up and maybe someone can use them to complete a set or practice trimming case length. I decided to just leave the previously posted articles for the new people we seem to be seeing more of.
Steve
3%er0 -
Martial Law Alert Over Swine Flu
Source: baltimore chronicle
Article by Stephen Lendman
Monday, 7 September 2009
Massachusetts may be a trial balloon for what federal authorities plan everywhere as the fall flu season approaches, to be followed by hyped reports of nationwide Swine Flu outbreaks, perhaps caused by the vaccines intended to prevent them.
Fact check:
no Swine Flu threat exists;
reported H1N1 infections and deaths are uncorroborated;
WHO predicting a global pandemic affecting "as many as two billion people....over the next two years" is falsified hype unless a diabolical depopulation scheme (by vaccines or other means) plans to create one;
vaccines don't protect against diseases they're designed to prevent and often cause them;
all vaccines contain harmful toxins, including mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, phenoxyethanol (antifreeze), and squalene adjuvants that weaken and can destroy the human immune system, making it vulnerable to many annoying to life-threatening illnesses; and
evidence suggests that the H1N1 strain was bioengineered in a US laboratory, and the vaccines being produced for it are extremely hazardous and potentially lethal.
Under no circumstances should anyone submit to them even if threatened with fines, quarantine, or incarceration.
Government and PhRMA Are Enemies, Not Protectors
On April 26, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a "Determination that a Public Health Emergency Exists....as a consequence of confirmed cases of H1N1 Influenza in four US states." At an April 27 press briefing, Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano said:
Yesterday "I issued a public health emergency declaration" as part of "standard operating procedure" to make more government resources available to combat the spread of Swine Flu. She then ordered the FDA "to proceed to permit things like Tamiflu to be used for populations that they otherwise wouldn't be used for - in this case, for example, very, very young children."
On November 13, 2005, Japan's Health Ministry said it was "looking into reports of a number of sudden deaths of young people who had taken prescribed dosages of Tamiflu." The Ministry also "found 64 cases of psychological disorders linked to the drug in the past four years."
The Japan Institute of Pharmaco-Vigilance head, Dr. Rokura Hama, said "Tamiflu appears to be similar to other powerful drugs that can cause behavioral changes" by affecting the central nervous system. It's the leading medication prescribed for the treatment and prevention of flu. In April, DHS ordered 12 million doses made available in locations around the country for quick access if needed.
Then on June 11, the World Health Organization (WHO) "raise(d) the level of (Swine Flu) influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to phase 6," its highest level in declaring "The world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic," while admitting its severity would likely be "moderate (and) most people will recover from swine flu within a week, just as they would from seasonal forms of influenza." The WHO no longer reports "confirmed" Swine Flu cases globally, yet continues to hype the scare without corroborating proof.
There was no emergency earlier or now, but you'd never know it from hyped media reports to convince people voluntarily to submit to experimental, untested, toxic and extremely dangerous vaccines that damage the human immune system and cause health problems ranging from annoying to life-threatening.
George Bush's Executive Orders (EOs) 13295 and 13375, Homeland Security Presidential Directive-21, and Military Pandemic Planning
In addition to the federal laws below, the Bush EOs, HSPD-21, and Pentagon plan suggest a hidden agenda behind today's Swine Flu crisis as a way to institute martial law on the pretext of a public health emergency, using hyped fear to win popular acquiescence.
On April 4, 2003, EO 13295 issued a "Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases" that included cholera, diphtheria, infectious TB, plague, smallpox, yellow fever, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and viral hemorrhagic fevers like ebola and lassa.
On April 1, 2005, EO 13375 amended EO 13295 by adding "the following new subsection:"
"(c) Influenza caused by novel or reemergent influenza viruses that are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic."
The October 2007 HSPD-21 "establishe(d) a National Strategy for Public Health and Medical Preparedness which builds upon principles set forth in (the 2004) Biodefense for the 21st Century and will transform our national approach to protecting the health of the American people against all disasters."
It called for:
"nationwide, robust, and integrated biosurveillance...to provide early warning and ongoing characterization of disease outbreaks in near real-time;
countermeasure stockpiling and distribution....of medical countermeasures (vaccines, drugs, and therapeutics) to a large population....;
mass casualty care....created by a catastrophic health event;" and
"community resilience" whereby "civic leaders, citizens, and families are educated regarding threats and are empowered to mitigate their own risk;" in addition, the federal government must be involved in "medical preparedness to assist (nationwide) in the face of potential catastrophic health events."
In May 2007, the Department of Defense's (DOD) "Implementation Plan for Pandemic Influenza" prepared for a possible H5N1 (Avian Flu) pandemic that could affect up to one-third of the population and kill as many as three million in just weeks, it was claimed. It involved using US troops to put down riots, guard pharmaceutical plants and shipments, and restrict the movement of people inside the country and across borders.
This plan remains active and US laws authorize it, including Sections 1076 and 333 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 that amended the 1807 Insurrection Act and 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. They prohibit using federal and National Guard troops for law enforcement except as constitutionally allowed or expressly authorized by Congress in times of a national emergency like an insurrection.
The president may now announce a public emergency, declare martial law, suspend the Constitution, and deploy US troops on city streets to suppress what he calls disorder.
The Legal Basis for Quarantines
Vaccine law expert Alan G. Phillips says:
"....underlying laws....allow states to mandate vaccines in an emergency....throw out exemptions....impose quarantines and isolation outside of our homes," and the only way around this is to "chang(e) state policy and law."
US laws are similar. They can mandate vaccinations and let states isolate and quarantine Swine Flu victims if authorities call the disease infectious and life-threatening.
Under the proposed Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSEHPA), civil liberties may be suspended in case of a public health emergency, with or without verifiable evidence.
The September 2003 Turning Point Model State Public Health Act (MSPHA) lets state, local, and tribal governments revise or update public health statutes and administrative regulations. According to James Hodges, executive director of Johns Hopkins and Georgetown University's Centers for Law and the Public Health, over half the states have these laws that can order flu testing, ban public gatherings, mandate quarantines, and issue other emergency public health directives.
Federal laws already do it, including the 2006 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act that lets the HHS Secretary declare any disease an epidemic or national emergency requiring mandatory vaccinations. It also protects drug companies from tort liability, except in cases of "willful misconduct."
US State Responses to Swine Flu
Growing numbers of states are exploiting the hyped scare by declaring a public health emergency. Others are passing laws that order forced quarantines, impose fines or imprisonment for offenders, and prepare to govern under martial law with local police, National Guard, or federal troops for enforcement.
Florida ordered voluntary or mandatory detentions at home or in state-designated facilities as well as closures of suspected buildings and areas. Quarantine Detention Orders state:
"non-compliant" persons are ordered to "remain in detention quarantine until released by the State Epidemiologist or Health Officer;"
at home, they must wear surgical masks at all times in the presence of anyone, even family members, and follow other required instructions while in isolation;
in state-run facilities, they must "comply with all orders....regarding (their) medical care," and must "cooperate with the detention facility's access to (themselves) and (their) medical records for purposes of delivering and monitoring (their) medical care;" and
these "action(s are) taken under the police power authority of the health department and your cooperation is required by law;" failure to comply is a "crime."
Forms circulating on the Internet show that Iowa ordered home or facility quarantines for anyone suspected of possible H1N1 infection. However, Mason City, Iowa's KIMT TV 3 reported that "Health leaders in (the state) are reassuring people that there are no H1N1 related quarantines being ordered," yet preparations have been made to do it.
North Carolina's Draft Isolation Order calls for imprisonment for up to two years and pretrial detention for residents failing to comply with isolation orders.
Washington empowers local health authorities to issue emergency detention orders for up to 10 days.
On April 28, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a "Proclamation to Confront Swine Flu Outbreak" and ordered "all state agencies and departments to utilize and employ state personnel, equipment and facilities to assist the Department of Public Health (DPH) and the State Emergency Plan as coordinated by the California Emergency Management Agency."
He further proclaimed a "state of emergency" because of "conditions of extreme peril" in the State.
On April 26, New York Gov. David Paterson activated the state's health emergency preparedness plan, thereby putting the state on "high alert to quickly identify and respond to any cases of swine flu." No further action was taken.
On April 28, Texas became the second state to declare a Swine Flu emergency as officials closed schools and cancelled sporting events after an alleged fatality was reported. At a press conference, Gov. Rick Perry said:
"I'm issuing a disaster declaration which covers the entire state. This will move Texas to a higher state of alert and release resources to address the spread of the virus." No further action was taken.
On May 1, Maryland's Gov. Martin O'Malley's executive order declared a public health emergency "based on an abundance of caution and concern for our students...If there is a probable case of H1N1 virus at any school, we will close that school and cease all extra-curricular activities for up to 14 days."
He also ordered "appropriate emergency protective measures (be taken to) assist public and private sector employers (take) proactive steps to prevent the spread to influenza workers and their families." He stopped short of more draconian measures, including statewide forced vaccinations and quarantines for resisters.
On August 6, the Minneapolis-St.Paul Star Tribune headlined: "As fall approaches, officials are taking a hard look at emergency plans in the event the virus strikes more aggressively." On August 10, the paper reported, without elaboration, that state officials "have a plan ready if Minnesota's health care system is swamped by 1.5 million cases."
Other states took similar actions, including Nebraska, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin, and still others are considering them as the fall flu season approaches and children return to school.
After earlier issuing a "Proclamation of Civil Emergency due to a Highly Infectious Disease," Maine Gov. John Balducci signed a Swine Flu civil emergency decree on September 1 that gives the WHO and UN martial law authority over the state and authorized the Maine Center for Disease Control to vaccinate the state's residents. Making this mandatory wasn't mentioned, but state civil emergency powers may allow it if ordered.
On April 28, the Massachusetts Senate unanimously passed the most draconian law to date, S. 2028, that imposes virtual martial law authority. If it's passed in the House and becomes law, it gives the governor sweeping powers, lets public health officials mandate vaccinations, and, with law enforcement and medical personnel, enter private residences and businesses without warrants, quarantine non-compliers, and impose $1,000-a-day fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 days.
It also authorizes:
closures and evacuations to decontaminate residences, buildings or facilities;
the destruction of suspect materials;
restricting or prohibiting public gatherings;
public health authorities to use or supervise private health care facilities and requires private health personnel to provide appropriate services, including vaccinating state residents;
"the arrest without warrant (of anyone believed to have) violated an order for isolation or quarantine...;"
control over "ingress (and) egress" from public areas and human traffic within them;
enforcement measures for the safe disposal of "infectious waste and human remains;"
control over all medical supplies as well as other measures needed to respond to the emergency;
the use of state police for enforcement;
control over "routes of transportation and over materials and facilities including but not limited to communication devices, carriers, public utilities, fuels, food, clothing, and shelter;" and
public health officials to "institute appropriate civil proceedings against (properties) to be destroyed in accordance with the existing laws and rules of the courts of this Commonwealth or any such rules that may be developed by the courts for use during the emergency;" acquired properties may "be disposed of by destruction as the court may direct."
Massachusetts may be a trial balloon for what federal authorities plan everywhere as the fall flu season approaches, to be followed by hyped reports of nationwide Swine Flu outbreaks, perhaps caused by the vaccines intended to prevent them.
In early July, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that children, pregnant women, health care workers, and adults with chronic illnesses will be first to be vaccinated. Reports indicate that inoculations will begin in early October, preceded by media-hyped fear urging everyone to get one.0 -
Califonia Lawmakers Pass Gun Show Ban
Source: website currently under attack
Text: The days of gun shows at the Cow Palace appear numbered.
By a 45-33 margin, the California Assembly on Wednesday passed legislation banning the sale of firearms and ammunition at the state-owned entertainment venue.
The Assembly's vote came three months after the state Senate approved the bill, which is expected to head to the governor's desk in the next few weeks.
If Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signs Senate Bill 585 into law, the ban will take effect Jan. 1, 2013.
The bill is "about respecting local values and local standards," said state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, who authored the legislation. The residents around the Cow Palace "do not want gun shows there."
According to Leno, 44 percent of the homicides and more than 30 percent of the guns seized in the city and county of San Francisco have happened in the surrounding communities of Visitacion Valley, Bayview-Hunters Point and the Mission District since 20050 -
The Gun-Grabbers are on the Move Again
Source: infowars
Alan Caruba
Borderfire Report
September 10, 2009
Every despotic regime in the last century favored gun control laws. Today, the gun-grabbers are on the move again and are being led by the Obama regime.
During last year's campaign both Hillary Clinton and John McCain tore into Barack Obama for saying that residents of small-town America "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them out of bitterness over lost jobs."
Obama quickly retreated from that statement, but it revealed his real thinking and real feelings about people who own guns for any reason, as well as his contempt for people whose religious values are an important part of their lives. In both cases he was condemning large segments of the nation's population.
In America today, the figure I hear most often is an estimated ninety million people who own guns. No matter the source one cites, there is no question that most Americans have no qualms about owning guns for hunting, sport shooting, or for protection. It is no coincidence that, since Obama's election last year, gun and ammo sales have been off the chart.
Look back at what history teaches us regarding the right to bear arms. The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929. Unable to defend themselves, the regime killed an estimated twenty million Russian dissidents.
Turkey established gun control in 1911 and, from 1915 to 1917, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were rounded up and killed.
Germany established gun control in 1938. Prior to and throughout World War II, the Nazis systematically murdered an estimated six million Jews and another five million others deemed "enemies of the state." This pattern was repeated in China which outlawed gun ownership in 1935. Gun ownership was outlawed in Guatemala, Uganda, and Cambodia.
It is estimated that 56 million people were killed by their own governments in the last century. Despite that, both England and Australia passed laws prohibiting gun ownership. The result has been a surge in deaths of people who were killed because they were left defenseless against criminals. In Australia, armed robberies increased 44 percent.
As this is being written, there are proposed laws in the House and Senate that would strip Americans of their Second Amendment right to "to keep and bear arms." A right the Constitution says "shall not be infringed."
Recently, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced S.1317 that would give the Attorney General the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists. The government's consolidated watch list, used to identify people suspected of links to terrorists, has now grown to more than a million names since 9/11.
In Lautenberg's New Jersey, one must have a government issued certificate to purchase a firearm and undergo a difficult process to secure the right to carry a weapon, concealed or otherwise.
A similar law, the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 would make it illegal to own a firearm unless you are fingerprinted and can provide a current driver's license along with your Social Security number. It requires people to submit to a physical and mental evaluation each and every time a firearm is purchased.
In addition, Blair-Holt would require that guns must be locked away and inaccessible to any child under age 18. It would empower law enforcement officers to come into your home to inspect whether or not you are in compliance. Failure to comply includes a fine and incarceration up to five years in prison. In a case of criminal home invasion this law renders the gun owner defenseless.
This replicates the 1938 German Weapons Act that restricted ownership of firearms to "persons whose trustworthyness is not in question and who can show a need for a (gun) permit."
These proposed laws also abrogate the Fourth Amendment that says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures" shall not be violated without a warrant.
To learn more about these "under the radar" efforts to restrict gun ownership and the right to carry firearms, visit http://www.saf.org/, the website of the Second Amendment Foundation and http://www.ccrkba.org/, the website of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
What I have described are incremental steps taken to ultimately render the Second Amendment null and void.
If you oppose these efforts, you need to write your representatives in Congress and let them know. A donation to the Second Amendment Foundation and/or the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms will assist their efforts on your behalf.
Despite the anti-gun attitude of the current White House I have always found it incongruous that the President is surrounded by men and women in the Secret Service, all of whom carry firearms to protect whoever holds that office. Members of Congress are protected by a Capitol Hill police force, all of whom are armed. We all know that a gun is an essential part of what every police officer wears daily while enforcing the law.
When writing the Constitution, the Founding Fathers first protected free speech, freedom of the press, and the freedom of citizens to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The Second Amendment gave priority to the right to own and bear arms because you cannot have the freedoms enumerated in the First Amendment without those protected in the Second.0 -
Police Train To Forcibly Draw Blood From Drunk Driving Suspects
Source: infowars
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, September 14, 2009
The Associated Press reports today on a truly chilling and nightmarish police program that we have highlighted before - cops forcibly jabbing a syringe into your arm and extracting blood if you are "suspected" of drunk-driving.
The opening two paragraphs in the AP report alone sound like something straight out of a twilight zone episode where vampires have taken over America and turned it into a tyrannical police state in order to satisfy their blood lust. Sound overstated? Read it for yourself.
When police officer Darryll Dowell is on patrol in the southwestern Idaho city of Nampa, he'll pull up at a stoplight and usually start casing the vehicle. Nowadays, his eyes will also focus on the driver's arms, as he tries to search for a plump, bouncy vein.
"I was looking at people's arms and hands, thinking, `I could draw from that,'" Dowell said.
The article then goes on to describe how officers in Texas and Idaho are training to withdraw blood from "suspects" as a replacement for the standard breathalyzer test, primarily because police can't make anyone breathe into a tube but apparently, in the "land of the free," they can forcibly hold someone down and jab a needle into their arm and take their blood, "a practice that's been upheld by Idaho's Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court," according to the report.
The U.S. Supreme Court also once ruled that black people were slaves, property of their slaveowners with no inherent rights whatsoever, and that those designated to be "feeble minded" by the government could be sterilized - in neither case was either of these rulings in accordance with natural God given rights bestowed upon mankind, as history has shown.
Likewise, cops forcibly jabbing needles in people who are merely "suspected" of being drunk drivers is a total abomination, a complete violation of basic human rights under the Nuremberg code, and one that will likely lead to many injuries and infections - not to mention a cascade of lawsuits.
Despite being littered with internal checkpoints that are now starting to pop up all over America, not even the Nazis or the Soviets sank to the depth of having their goons forcibly stick needles into people's arms to take their blood.
The practice of cops drawing blood at the side of the road has been in place in some areas since 1995 but the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has indicated that the program is ultimately intended to be introduced nationwide.
Nicole Watson, the College of Western Idaho phlebotomy instructor teaching the Idaho officers, described how the process would unfold.
Once they're back on patrol, they will draw blood of any suspected drunk driver who refuses a breath test. They'll use force if they need to, such as getting help from another officer to pin down a suspect and potentially strap them down, Watson said.
Of course, once Americans are trained to accept authority figures jabbing them with needles against their will on a whim, programs for mandatory mass vaccination will be all the more easier to implement.
Cops across America are already armed with Tasers for the purpose of inflicting "pain compliance," otherwise known as torture, now they will also be wielding needles while eyeing up your "plump, bouncy vein".
Welcome to Amerika 2009 - land of the vampires, home of the slave.
side note: while I do not condone drinking and driving, or drinking and hunting, blood can be used for a multitude of tasks and the thought of giving it up so easily unless I'm giving some O neg to my mom repulses me.0 -
While We Were Looking The Other Way-Obama To Be First President To Chair UN Security Council
Source: rightsoup
Some unprecedented news today, folks. Never in the history of the United Nations has a U.S. President taken the chairmanship of the powerful UN Security Council. Perhaps it is because of what could arguably be a Constitutional prohibition against doing so. To wit: Section 9 of the Constitution says:
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
Nonetheless, the rotating chairmanship of the council goes to the U.S. this month. The normal course of business would have U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice take the gavel. However, this time will be different. Constitution be damned, Barack Hussein Obama has decided to put HIMSELF in the drivers seat, and will preside over global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament talks slated to begin September 24th. The Financial Times says:
Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.
The topic for the summit-level session of the council on September 24 is nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament - one of several global challenges that the US now wants to see addressed at a multinational level.
UN officials also hope a climate change debate on September 22 will give fresh impetus to the search for a global climate deal at Copenhagen in December. There are also hopes a possible meeting between Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Authority president, that Mr. Obama would host, could lead to a breakthrough about a timetable for Middle East peace.
Here is what the UN Security Council does. Picture Obama as the Chair of this committee with this power.
Under the UN Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council are:
* to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations;
* to investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction;
* to recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms of settlement;
* to formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
* to determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to recommend what action should be taken;
* to call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force to prevent or stop aggression;
* to take military action against an aggressor;
* to recommend the admission of new Members;
* to exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in "strategic areas";
* to recommend to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court of Justice.
No American president has ever attempted to acquire the image of King of the Universe by officiating at a meeting of the UN's highest body. Obama apparently believes that being flanked by council-member heads of state like Col. Moammar Qaddafi - who is expected to be seated five seats to Obama's right - will cast a sufficiently blinding spell on Americans.
He undoubtedly hopes that the horrid state of the nation's economy, turmoil over health care, and a summer of racial scapegoating will pale by comparison. This role as UN Security Council chair will allow him to make decisions, influence legislation and resolutions, and set the agenda.
Right Soup will be closely following this very unsettling turn of events. Like I always say, pay attention to what Obama DOES.0 -
I've been meaning to squeeze these in for those who may not have seen them. It was a very exciting weekend for all of those who participated and watched the events. May I warn against future events that will spend time and money but humbly advise that you will carry that spirit to the local level.
The first is C-Span coverage of the 9/12 event in full. Not the whole weekend.
link to video Run time 3 hrs.
The second is a video I came across called Off the Grid, Life on the Mesa. It's a small documentary about the lives of a few servicemen that have been disregarded by thier country or society. Caution hippies, mild nudity, drug references.
link to video Run time 1hr9mins.0 -
Four Apparent Suicides/Deaths in 48 Hours - CEO-Financiers-Fundraiser
September 15, 2009
Source: dprogram
Rockefeller & Co's CEO committed suicide: report
(Reuters) - James McDonald, chief executive officer of investment management firm Rockefeller & Co, committed suicide on Sunday in Massachusetts, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the matter. - read more
Newport Beach financier Danny Pang dies at 42
(LATimes) - Newport Beach financier Danny Pang died early Saturday at a local hospital, according to the Orange County coroner's office. The cause of death has not been determined and an autopsy is planned for Sunday, said Larry Esslinger, supervising deputy coroner. - read more
Financier Finn Casperson dead in apparent suicide
(Inquisitr) - Ex-CEO of Beneficial Corp. Finn H.W. Casperson was found dead in an apparent suicide behind an office building in Westerly, Rhode Island. - read more
Dying Blagojevich fundraiser said he overdosed, mayor says
(CNN) - Police are investigating the death of the former chief fundraiser for ex-Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich as a "death-suicide," an Illinois mayor said Sunday. - read more
Sounds about as fishy as the DC Madam case.0 -
Obama Backs Extending Patriot Act Spy Devisions
Source: wired
Article by: David Kravets
The Obama administration has told Congress it supports renewing three provisions of the Patriot Act due to expire at year's end, measures making it easier for the government to spy within the United States.
In a letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department said the administration might consider "modifications" to the act in order to protect civil liberties.
"The administration is willing to consider such ideas, provided that they do not undermine the effectiveness of these important authorities," Ronald Weich, assistant attorney general, wrote to Leahy, (.pdf) whose committee is expected to consider renewing the three expiring Patriot Act provisions next week. The government disclosed the letter Tuesday.
It should come as no surprise that President Barack Obama supports renewing the provisions, which were part of the Patriot Act approved six weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
As an Illinois senator in 2008, he voted to allow the warrantless monitoring of Americans' electronic communications if they are communicating overseas with somebody the government believes is linked to terrorism. That legislative package, which President George W. Bush signed, also immunized the nation's telecommunication companies from lawsuits charging them with being complicit with the Bush administration's warrantless, wiretapping program. That program was also adopted in the wake of Sept. 11.
These are the three provisions due to expire:
*A secret court, known as the FISA court, may grant "roving wiretaps" without the government identifying the target. Generally, the authorities must assert that the target is an agent of a foreign power and/or a suspected terrorist. The government said Tuesday that 22 such warrants - which allow the monitoring of any communication device - have been granted annually.
*The FISA court may grant warrants for "business records," from banking to library to medical records. Generally, the government must assert that the records are relevant to foreign intelligence gathering and/or a terrorism investigation. The government said Tuesday that 220 of these warrants had been granted between 2004 and 2007. It said 2004 was the first year those powers were used.
*A so-called "lone wolf" provision, enacted in 2004, allows FISA court warrants for the electronic monitoring of an individual even without showing that the person is an agent of a foreign power or a suspected terrorist. The government said Tuesday it has never invoked that provision, but said it wants to keep the authority to do so.
"The basic idea behind the authority was to cover situations in which information linking the target of an investigation to an international group was absent or insufficient, although the target's engagement in `international terrorism' was sufficiently established," Weich wrote.
The American Civil Liberties opposes renewing all three provisions, especially the lone wolf measure.
Michelle Richardson, the ACLU's legislative counsel, said in a telephone interview, "The justification for FISA and these lower standards and letting it operate in secret was all about terrorist groups and foreign governments, that they posed a unique threat other than the normal criminal element. This lone wolf provision undercuts that justification".0 -
Health Care Reform and The Constitution
Source:online.wsj
By ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
Last week, I asked South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, where in the Constitution it authorizes the federal government to regulate the delivery of health care. He replied: "There's nothing in the Constitution that says that the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do." Then he shot back: "How about [you] show me where in the Constitution it prohibits the federal government from doing this?"
Rep. Clyburn, like many of his colleagues, seems to have conveniently forgotten that the federal government has only specific enumerated powers. He also seems to have overlooked the Ninth and 10th Amendments, which limit Congress's powers only to those granted in the Constitution.
One of those powers-the power "to regulate" interstate commerce-is the favorite hook on which Congress hangs its hat in order to justify the regulation of anything it wants to control.
Unfortunately, a notoriously tendentious New Deal-era Supreme Court decision has given Congress a green light to use the Commerce Clause to regulate noncommercial, and even purely local, private behavior. In Wickard v. Filburn (1942), the Supreme Court held that a farmer who grew wheat just for the consumption of his own family violated federal agricultural guidelines enacted pursuant to the Commerce Clause. Though the wheat did not move across state lines-indeed, it never left his farm-the Court held that if other similarly situated farmers were permitted to do the same it, might have an aggregate effect on interstate commerce.
James Madison, who argued that to regulate meant to keep regular, would have shuddered at such circular reasoning. Madison's understanding was the commonly held one in 1789, since the principle reason for the Constitutional Convention was to establish a central government that would prevent ruinous state-imposed tariffs that favored in-state businesses. It would do so by assuring that commerce between the states was kept "regular."
The Supreme Court finally came to its senses when it invalidated a congressional ban on illegal guns within 1,000 feet of public schools. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court ruled that the Commerce Clause may only be used by Congress to regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core and that has not traditionally been regulated by the states. The movement of illegal guns from one state to another, the Court ruled, was criminal and not commercial at its core, and school safety has historically been a state function.
Applying these principles to President Barack Obama's health-care proposal, it's clear that his plan is unconstitutional at its core. The practice of medicine consists of the delivery of intimate services to the human body. In almost all instances, the delivery of medical services occurs in one place and does not move across interstate lines. One goes to a physician not to engage in commercial activity, as the Framers of the Constitution understood, but to improve one's health. And the practice of medicine, much like public school safety, has been regulated by states for the past century.
The same Congress that wants to tell family farmers what to grow in their backyards has declined "to keep regular" the commercial sale of insurance policies. It has permitted all 50 states to erect the type of barriers that the Commerce Clause was written precisely to tear down. Insurers are barred from selling policies to people in another state.
That's right: Congress refuses to keep commerce regular when the commercial activity is the sale of insurance, but claims it can regulate the removal of a person's appendix because that constitutes interstate commerce.
What we have here is raw abuse of power by the federal government for political purposes. The president and his colleagues want to reward their supporters with "free" health care that the rest of us will end up paying for. Their only restraint on their exercise of Commerce Clause power is whatever they can get away with. They aren't upholding the Constitution-they are evading it.0 -
LINE OF SUCCESSION IF OBAMA/SOETORO REMOVED FROM OFFICE
Source: newswithviews
By: Devvy
September 17, 2009
c 2009 - NewsWithViews.com
Today is Constitution Day. Sadly, tens of millions of Americans have no clue what it means. Just another day to hit the hog trough or one more day until TGIF. On September 17, 1787, the U.S. Constitution was signed. How very lucky we are there were 39 real men back then who didn't cower at the mere thought of standing up for what they believe in and fighting for it.
It is an appropriate day to look at the consequences of the constitutional crisis we face with the removal of an usurper from office. In this case, an individual who has no legal right to serve as president of our republic. It must be done.
Over the decades we have seen millions demand every president be impeached. Nixon at least stepped down. Bill Clinton, disgraced the nation with his whoring and fought to stay in office. Of course, he had the full support of his militant, Marxist business partner, Hillary Clinton. The stupid Republicans made a mess of the entire, disgraceful "event" by going after Clinton on a sex charge instead of treason among other crimes. They walked right into the trap that was awaiting them.
It was all a set up and America was sold out. I saw David Schippers speak at a Judicial Watch function in Washington, DC; I think in 2000. I've read his book, Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton's Impeachment:
"Schippers, the former Chief Investigative Counsel of the House Judiciary Committee and a loyal Democrat, went against his party, the press, and public opinion to build a case against President Clinton and bring him to justice. He shows how the entire impeachment process was rigged, and gives insider information on why Democrats and Republicans conspired to conceal evidence of criminal offenses, how Clinton tried to keep his women quiet, and how Republicans cooperated with Janet Reno's Justice Department to keep secret the report on possibly impeachable Clinton-Gore fundraising offenses."
For eight years, Americans demanded Bush be impeached. I want him tried for murder; there is no statute of limitations. [1] Unfortunately, it seems there are no real men or women in law enforcement willing to stand up and say no one is above the law. Cowardice runs deep in this country.
My mail box has been drowning since my last column. The big question is who would replace Obama/Soetoro if he were removed from office? This question scares people to the point they write it's better to leave an usurper in office than face the horror of sorting through the mess Obama/Soetoro has created. I suspect this is also the gutless position of many elected public servants in the Republican Party, "conservative" talk radio hosts, TV shows anchors and federal judges. It's always easier to talk the talk than walk the hard road. And, no, it's not "better" to leave a liar and deceiver in office until the next rigged election.
Obama/Soetoro cannot be impeached even though he's always known he was constitutionally ineligible:
"Seventh, if Obama does become an usurper posturing as "the President," Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be "removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other public officials would have to arrest him-with physical force, if he would not go along quietly-in order to prevent him from continuing his imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to armed conflicts within the General Government itself, or among the States and the people." [2]
In other words, removing an usurper from office means he never occupied the office.
Obama/Soetoro also solicited campaign funds; some $600 million plus. Tens of millions is believed to have come from illegal sources. [3] That is a violation of the wire fraud fraud statutes; 18 U.S.C. ?1346. [4]
According to the U.S. Constitution, next in line should a president be unable to fulfill his duties, the vice president is sworn into office. Of course, this situation with an usurper in the White House is historical, although Chester Arthur got away with it. [5] Does the Twenty Fifth Amendment kick in here?
However, in this case, I believe Biden would not be constitutionally eligible to replace Obama/Soetoro. Since the usurper gained office via fraud by lying and covering up the fact that he was not a 'natural born citizen at birth,' and since Biden [6] was his choice for VP, old Joe rode in on the fraud. Additionally, I believe Biden is in the early stages of dementia and unfit for office. I have family who suffer from the onset of dementia. I have watched Biden and listened to his seemingly harmless flubs when speaking. He does have obvious short term memory loss. I wonder what kind of medications he's taking?
If both Obama/Soetoro and Biden are jettisoned, next in line is the Speaker of the House of Representatives and this is the one that scares the hell out of people. Nancy Pelosi is known as a shrewd deal maker. She is a morally bankrupt Marxist who has never paid any attention to the U.S. Constitution. She's also a nitwit of the first order. At this time, we the people are pushing for an investigation into her activities regarding the certifications following the Democratic National Convention.
If Pelosi, Howard Dean, et al have been involved in a cover up to conceal the fact that they knew Obama/Soetoro was not a natural born citizen at birth, the American people will not stand for her taking the White House while under investigation for conspiracy to defraud the American people.
Next. President pro tempore of the U.S. Senate is up next. Who is that? By tradition, this position goes to the senior member of the majority party. Hold on 'cause this one is a doozy: Sen. Robert Byrd [D-WVA]. Byrd has been parked in the senate since 1959 - 50 years. He is 92 years old. Old Bob joined the Klu Klux Klan in 1942; he later dropped out. Does anyone really think Byrd would ever get within two feet of being sworn in as a replacement president - even if he could stay awake long enough? Won't happen.
The next horrifying choice is Secretary of State, Marxist Hillary Clinton. But, wait! Many of us are anxiously waiting a court's ruling which would remove Comrade Clinton from her position as SOS. What? You didn't know that? Didn't ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN or the 'fair and balanced' FOX News Network tell you there is a lawsuit to remove her from office? There is and there's also no issue of standing in this case: Rodearmel v Clinton. The outlaws in the Senate were notified this lawsuit would be filed if Clinton were confirmed, but they could care less. It's the same old possession is 9/10s of the law. Just like Obama/Soetoro. Just like Sotomayer. Put these scoundrels and traitors in office and then try to get them removed.
There was a hearing scheduled for yesterday, but I didn't have any details before my deadline for this column:
Washington, DC -- September 14, 2009
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that a lawsuit challenging the constitutional eligibility of Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State (Rodearmel v. Clinton, et al., (D. District of Columbia)) will be heard by a special three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia: Date: Wednesday, September 16, Time: 9:30 AM ET, Location: Courtroom 22A, The E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse, 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001
That corrupt piece of baggage should have been prosecuted and sent to prison a decade ago. [7] But, wait! Don't you find this rather odd?
July 29, 2009: No political race in sight, but Hillary Clinton's camp is election-ready
I feel like I'm looking at the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List at the post office. Who comes after Secretary of State regarding line of succession? A good overview is here.
I know what you're thinking: How did we end up here? How could the people above hold such positions of power while being so corrupt? Well, the American people have been asleep for decades. Their blind loyalty to one of the two parties, regardless of how corrupt the candidate/incumbent, has ushered in all these crooks decade after decade. All for the party. The electronic voting machines and scanners have done the rest.
A couple of panicked people wrote, "Do you realize chaos would explode in this country? Is that what you want?" The country is already in chaos on many levels and it will accelerate over the next year. We cannot worry about a vague threat of a race war. We deal with what comes. We need to worry right this minute because it looks like the outlaws in Congress are going to stay in DC, past the normal shut down every September 30th. They, along with the Red in the White House are going to try to ram down every one of these monster bills that are ALL unconstitutional:
"Last week, I asked South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, where in the Constitution it authorizes the federal government to regulate the delivery of health care. He replied: "There's nothing in the Constitution that says that the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do." Then he shot back: "How about [you] show me where in the Constitution it prohibits the federal government from doing this?
"Rep. Clyburn, like many of his colleagues, seems to have conveniently forgotten that the federal government has only specific enumerated powers. He also seems to have overlooked the Ninth and 10th Amendments, which limit Congress's powers only to those granted in the Constitution." Judge Andrew Napolitano, September 15, 2009
As I have written before, Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Obama, aka Barack Dunham, aka Barry Dunham is responsible for this mess. He has always had the option not to run for office knowing he was committing a litany of crimes. No doubt his Marxist friends and coconspirators convinced him he could pull this off. Make no mistake - the narcissist in chief has very powerful friends (see: Obama and Ayers and Sidley Austin LLP) who have a lot of scratch riding on him. Not to mention jamming communism down our throats. This is going to be a fight to the end and it's going to get uglier. The usurper has signed countless bills into law and issued Executive Orders. All are null and void.
If our Constitution is to have any legitimacy, Obama/Soetoro must be removed from office. It doesn't matter if a long form birth certificate is produced that can be independently authenticated which shows he was born in Kenya, Kansas or Hawaii -- it is his father's status that makes Obama/Soetoro forever ineligible. He was born with dual citizenship and no amount of lies, twisting the truth with silliness about his mother 'gifting' citizenship to her son can change that one fact. Should an authentic birth certificate prove he was born in Kenya, that will further cement what millions know: Obama/Soetoro is a master liar who has shamelessly manipulated the American people for his own gain.
In my last column I gave you links to excellent sources on the legal arguments and facts. This past April, an official with the Kentucky Elections office made a request to their Attorney General to investigate the issue; see here. As I covered in my last column, Rep. Rappaport (NH) requested their SOS open an investigation. According to this news item, it appears Gardner might be back to his old tricks. Of course, how can you believe what's in that article when the flunky who wrote it just parrots propaganda: "A quick Internet search turns up a copy of Obama's birth certificate online. Not to mention there was a birth announcement in a Hawaii newspaper."
Now, it is up to the people of New Hampshire to flood Gardner's office with requests to investigate or it won't happen. Additionally, there is a web site which has a Model Complaint of Election Fraud to State Attorney's General; click here. I believe we need to direct the pressure at the state level. Election fraud by the DNC, Pelosi, et al. The momentum will continue to grow because we the people will demand this crisis be addressed. We can exert great pressure at the state level.
Judge Clay Land, a Bush appointee, ruled against the truth yesterday in Rhodes v McDonald. He called the lawsuit frivolous and threatened to sanction Dr. Taitz. Of course, it's frivolous for a soldier getting deployed to a combat zone to ask for confirmation that the Commander-in-Chief is legitimate. Land was particularly harsh and wants everyone to know in his order that Capt. Rhodes got a free medical education and implied she is a coward:
"But she does not want to go to Iraq (or to any other destination where she may be in harm's way, for that matter). Her "conscientious objections" to serving under the current Commander in Chief apparently can be accommodated as long as she is permitted to remain on American soil."
Is it possible at some point Obama/Soetoro will become such a liability his handlers will kick him to the curb and he steps down? Not likely, but one never knows. The destroyers protect their interests first. The Obama's of the world are expendable. The one thing no one should do is under estimate just how evil and powerful are those who own Congress and the White House. This is high stakes business.
There are 50 state governors and 50 state legislatures to contain any crisis that arises from this mess Obama/Soetoro has created. As for the outlaws in Congress, one step at a time in resolving this mess. Could a special election be held? Yes. It would be historical, but we the people are up to the challenge because this is our country and we want everyone held to the law no matter how painful.
The American people cannot, must not ignore the U.S. Constitution for political expediency. Either we are a nation of laws or lies. We will not survive governed by liars who lust for power. The solution to succession and how to handle a special election can all be done intelligently, rationally and without hysteria. This nation has survived incredible battles and odds before and we will do so again.0 -
Thank you Steve. I don't get much time on the puter now days and I like reading your posts. Very informative. After all, information (intell) is a basic requirement for any action.[:)] 0 -
Thank you sir 0 -
I'm going for a walkabout. Best of luck to all. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5axlwCBXC8&feature=related
I'll be the one wearing a black stetson holding my thumb out.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
336 comments