RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION WE HAVE LEARNED ITS MEANING

08/31/2013

http://www.newswithviews.com/Publius/huldah121.htm

By Publius Huldah
August 31, 2013
NewsWithViews.com

Our Constitution really was a 5000 Year Miracle.

The attached pdf chart illustrates the Miracle.

Rights come from God, and the purpose of civil governments is to secure the rights God gave us.

Accordingly, WE THE PEOPLE ordained and established the Constitution for the United States of America wherein we created the federal government.

A “federal government” is an alliance of Sovereign States associated together in a “federation” with a national government to which is delegated supremacy over the States in specifically defined areas only.

These specifically defined areas are the “enumerated powers” WE delegated to the three branches of the national (“federal”) government.

The States and The People retained all other powers.

The pdf chart depicts the elegant simplicity of our Constitution; lists the few and defined powers WE delegated to the national government for the Country at Large; shows how the powers WE delegated to the national government secure specific God given rights; and shows the retention of all other powers by the States and The People.

Our Constitution isn’t broken! Our Constitution isn’t outdated. The problem is that WE – who are “the natural guardians” of the Constitution – didn’t bother to learn it. Since we didn’t bother to learn it, we elected representatives who also hadn’t bothered to learn it. And so everyone ignores it.

And we abandoned the religious and moral foundation of our Constitution.

It is our own ignorance of our existing Constitution, and the collapse of religion and morality which have brought us to the brink of destruction.

Our Constitution doesn’t need “fixing”! The only Amendments we need are to repeal some of the previous Amendments we got deceived into approving.

WE THE PEOPLE need “fixing”. Restoration of our religious and moral foundation and our Constitution is the Answer to the Healing of our Land.

Let the Restoration begin with you. Share this Article. Print out the chart. Study it. Flesh it out with your own personal readings of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bible. Have study groups in your home.Youcan become a “guardian” of the Constitution.

© 2013 Publius Huldah – All Rights Reserved

Publius Huldah is a retired attorney who now lives in Tennessee. Before getting a law degree, she got a degree in philosophy where she specialized in political philosophy and epistemology (theories of knowledge). She now writes extensively on the U.S. Constitution, using the Federalist Papers to prove its original meaning and intent. She also shows how federal judges and politicians have ignored Our Constitution and replaced it with their personal opinions and beliefs.h

E-Mail: publiushuldah@gmail.com

The 5000 Year Leap

 Restore The Constitution, We Have Learned Its Meaning

Rights come from God, and the purpose of civil governments is to secure the rights God gave us. Accordingly, WE THE PEOPLE ordained and established the Constitution for the United States of America wherein we created the federal government. A “federal government” is an alliance of Sovereign States associated together in a “federation” with a national government to which is delegated supremacy over the States in specifically defined areas only……….
http://www.newswithviews.com/Publius/huldah121.htm
by Publius Huldah

 http://www.learntheconstitution.com/five-thousand-year-leap.html

 Author: W. Cleon Skousen

Discover the 28 fundamental beliefs of the Founding Fathers which they said must be understood and perpetuated by every people who desired peace, prosperity, and freedom.

These beliefs have made possible more progress in 200 years than was made previously in over 5,000 years.

The following is a brief overview of the principles found in The Five Thousand Year Leap, and one chapter is devoted to each of these 28 principles. 337 pages

 Principle 1 – The only reliable basis for sound government and just human relations is Natural Law.

Natural law is God’s law. There are certain laws which govern the entire universe, and just as Thomas Jefferson said in the Declaration of Independence, there are laws which govern in the affairs of men which are “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.”

Principle 2 – A free people cannot survive under a republican constitution unless they remain virtuous and morally strong.

“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” – Benjamin Franklin

Principle 3 – The most promising method of securing a virtuous people is to elect virtuous leaders.

“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who … will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man.” – Samuel Adams

Principle 4 – Without religion the government of a free people cannot be maintained.

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports…. And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.” – George Washington

Principle 5 – All things were created by God, therefore upon him all mankind are equally dependent, and to him they are equally responsible .

The American Founding Fathers considered the existence of the Creator as the most fundamental premise underlying all self-evident truth. They felt a person who boasted he or she was an atheist had just simply failed to apply his or her divine capacity for reason and observation.

Principle 6 – All mankind were created equal.

The Founders knew that in these three ways, all mankind are theoretically treated as:

1.       Equal before God.

2.       Equal before the law.

3.       Equal in their rights.

Principle 7 – The proper role of government is to protect equal rights, not provide equal things.

The Founders recognized that the people cannot delegate to their government any power except that which they have the lawful right to exercise themselves.

Principle 8 – Mankind are endowed by God with certain unalienable rights.

“Those rights, then, which God and nature have established, and are therefore called natural rights, such as are life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws to be more effectually invested in every man than they are; neither do they receive any additional strength when declared by the municipal [or state] laws to be inviolable. On the contrary, no human legislation has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the owner [of the right] shall himself commit some act that amounts to a forfeiture.” – William Blackstone

Principle 9 – To protect human rights, God has revealed a code of divine law.

“The doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the Holy Scriptures. These precepts, when revealed, are found by comparison to be really a part of the original law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences to man’s felicity.” – William Blackstone

Principle 10 – The God-given right to govern is vested in the sovereign authority of the whole people.

“The fabric of American empire ought to rest on the solid basis of the consent of the people. The streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that pure, original fountain of all legislative authority.” – Alexander Hamilton

Principle 11 – The majority of the people may alter or abolish a government which has become tyrannical.

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes … but when a long train of abuses and usurpations … evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.” – Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence

Principle 12 – The United States of Americashall be a republic.

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America
And to the republic for which it stands….”

Principle 13 – A Constitution should protect the people from the frailties of their rulers.

“If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary…. [But lacking these] you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” – James Madison

Principle 14 – Life and liberty are secure only so long as the rights of property are secure .

John Locke reasoned that God gave the earth and everything in it to the whole human family as a gift. Therefore the land, the sea, the acorns in the forest, the deer feeding in the meadow belong to everyone “in common.” However, the moment someone takes the trouble to change something from its original state of nature, that person has added his ingenuity or labor to make that change. Herein lies the secret to the origin of “property rights.”

Principle 15 – The highest level of prosperity occurs when there is a free-market economy and a minimum of government regulations.

Prosperity depends upon a climate of wholesome stimulation with four basic freedoms in operation:

1.       The Freedom to try.

2.       The Freedom to buy.

3.       The Freedom to sell.

4.       The Freedom to fail.

Principle 16 – The government should be separated into three branches .

“I call you to witness that I was the first member of the Congress who ventured to come out in public, as I did in January 1776, in my Thoughts on Government … in favor of a government with three branches and an independent judiciary. This pamphlet, you know, was very unpopular. No man appeared in public to support it but yourself.” – John Adams

Principle 17 – A system of checks and balances should be adopted to prevent the abuse of power by the different branches of government.

“It will not be denied that power is of an encroaching nature and that it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it.” – James Madison

Principle 18 – The unalienable rights of the people are most likely to be preserved if the principles of government are set forth in a written Constitution.

The structure of the American system is set forth in the Constitution of the United States and the only weaknesses which have appeared are those which were allowed to creep in despite the Constitution.

Principle 19 – Only limited and carefully defined powers should be delegated to government, all others being retained by the people.

The Tenth Amendment is the most widely violated provision of the bill of rights. If it had been respected and enforced America would be an amazingly different country than it is today. This amendment provides:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Principle 20 – Efficiency and dispatch require that the government operate according to the will of the majority, but constitutional provisions must be made to protect the rights of the minority.

“Every man, by consenting with others to make one body politic under one government, puts himself under an obligation to every one of that society to submit to the determination of the majority, and to be concluded [bound] by it.” – John Locke

Principle 21 – Strong local self-government is the keystone to preserving human freedom.

“The way to have good and safe government is not to trust it all to one, but to divide it among the many, distributing to every one exactly the functions he is competent [to perform best]. – Thomas Jefferson

Principle 22 – A free people should be governed by law and not by the whims of men.

“The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings, capable of laws, where there is no law there is no freedom. For liberty is to be free from restraint and violence of others, which cannot be where there is no law.” – John Locke

Principle 23 – A free society cannot survive as a republic without a broad program of general education.

“They made an early provision by law that every town consisting of so many families should be always furnished with a grammar school. They made it a crime for such a town to be destitute of a grammar schoolmaster for a few months, and subjected it to a heavy penalty. So that the education of all ranks of people was made the care and expense of the public, in a manner that I believe has been unknown to any other people, ancient or modern. The consequences of these establishments we see and feel every day [written in 1765]. A native of America who cannot read and write is as rare … as a comet or an earthquake.” John Adams

Principle 24 – A free people will not survive unless they stay strong.

“To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” – George Washington

Principle 25 – “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none.”- Thomas Jefferson, given in his first inaugural address.

Principle 26 – The core unit which determines the strength of any society is the family; therefore the government should foster and protect its integrity.

“There is certainly no country in the world where the tie of marriage is more respected than inAmerica , or where conjugal happiness is more highly or worthily appreciated.” Alexis de Tocqueville

Principle 27 – The burden of debt is as destructive to human freedom as subjugation by conquest.

“We are bound to defray expenses [of the war] within our own time, and are unauthorized to burden posterity with them…. We shall all consider ourselves morally bound to pay them ourselves and consequently within the life [expectancy] of the majority.” – Thomas Jefferson

Principle 28 – The United Stateshas a manifest destiny to eventually become a glorious example of God’s law under a restored Constitution that will inspire the entire human race.

The Founders sensed from the very beginning that they were on a divine mission. Their great disappointment was that it didn’t all come to pass in their day, but they knew that someday it would. John Adams wrote:

“I always consider the settlement of America with reverence and wonder, as the opening of a grand scene and design in Providence for the illumination of the ignorant, and the emancipation of the slavish part of mankind all over the earth.”

The 5,000-Year Leap – A Miracle that Changed the World

Study Guide

Softcover Price  19.95

10 13 11 flagbar

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


20 Triggers For Collapse If US Strikes Syria…

08/30/2013

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/08/20-triggers-for-collapse-if-us-strikes.html

 By Brandon Smith

For years now at Alt-Market I have carefully outlined the most likely path of collapse to take place within the U.S., and a vital part of that analysis included economic destabilization caused by a loss of the dollar’s world reserve status and petro-status. I have also always made clear that this fiscal crisis event would not occur in the midst of a political vacuum.

The central banks and international financiers that created our ongoing and developing disaster are NOT going to allow the destruction of the American economy, the dollar, or global markets without a cover event designed to hide their culpability. They need something big. Something so big that the average citizen is overwhelmed with fear and confusion. A smoke and mirrors magic trick so raw and soul shattering it leaves the very population of the Earth mesmerized and helpless to understand the root of the nightmare before them. The elites need a fabricated Apocalypse.

Enter Syria

I have been warning about the Syrian trigger point for a very long time. Syria’s mutual defense pact with Iran, its strong ties to Russia, the Russian naval base off its coast, the advanced Russian weaponry in it’s arsenal, its proximity to vulnerable oil shipping lanes, all make the nation a perfect catalyst for a global catastrophe. The civil war in Syria is already spreading into neighboring countries like Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon, and if one looks at the facts objectively, the entire war is a product of covert action on the part of the U.S. and its allies.

The U.S. trained, armed, and funded the insurgency using Al Qaeda operatives. Saudi Arabia has sent funding and arms as well. Israel has aided the rebels using air strikes within Syria’s borders (even though this means that the Israeli government is essentially helping their supposed mortal enemies). This war would NOT be taking place today without the express efforts of the West. Period.
If one takes more than a brief examination of the Syrian insurgency, they would find an organization of monsters. Wretched amoral wetwork ghouls whose crimes have been thoroughly documented, including the mass executions of unarmed captured soldiers, the torture and beheading of innocent civilians, the mutilation and cannibalism of dead bodies, and the institution of theological tyranny on a terrified populace. The U.S. created and unleashed these demons, and now, we the people are being asked by the White House to support them through force of arms.

But what is the goal here…?

The goal, I believe, is to utterly transform the world’s political, economic, and social systems. The goal is to generate intense fear; fear that can be used as capital to buy, as the globalists call it, a “new world order”. Syria is the first domino in a long chain of calamities; what the Rand Corporation sometimes refers to as a “linchpin”. As I write this, the Obama Administration is moving naval and ground forces into position and clamoring in a painfully pathetic fashion to convince the American public that 90% of us are “wrong” and that a strike on Syria is, in fact, necessary. It appears that the establishment is dead set on starting this chain reaction and accelerating the global collapse. So, if a strike does occur, what can we expect to happen over the next few years? Here is a rundown…

1) Many U.S. allies will refrain from immediate participation in an attack on Syria. Obama will continue unilaterally (or with the continued support of Israel and Saudi Arabia), placing even more focus on the U.S. as the primary cause of the crisis.

2) Obama will attempt to mitigate public outcry by limiting attacks to missile strikes, but these strikes will be highly ineffective compared to previous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

3) A no fly zone will be established, but the U.S. navy will seek to stay out of range of high grade Russian missile technology in the hands of Syria, and this will make response time to the Syrian Air Force more difficult. Expect much higher American naval and air force casualties compared to Iraq and Afghanistan.

4) Iran will immediately launch troops and arms in support of Syria. Syria will become a bewildering combat soup of various fighting forces battling on ideological terms, rather than over pure politics and borders. Battles will spread into other countries, covertly and overtly, much like during Vietnam.

5) Israel will probably be the first nation to send official ground troops into Syria (and likely Iran), citing a lack of effectiveness of U.S. airstrikes. American troops will follow soon after.

6) Iran will shut down the Straight of Hormuz sinking multiple freighters in the narrow shipping lane and aiming ocean skimming missiles at any boats trying to clear the wreckage. Oil exports through the straight of Hormuz will stop for months, cutting 20% of the world’s oil supply overnight.

7) The Egyptian civil war, now underway but ignored by the mainstream, will explode due to increased anger over U.S. presence in Syria. The Suez Canal will become a dangerous shipping option for oil exporters. Many will opt to travel around the Horn of Africa, adding two weeks to shipping time and increasing the cost of the oil carried.

8) Saudi Arabia will see an uprising of insurgency that has been brewing under the surface for years.

9) Gasoline prices will skyrocket. I am predicting a 75%-100% increase in prices within two-three months of any strike on Syria.

10) Travel will become difficult if not impossible with high gasoline costs. What little of our economy was still thriving on vacation dollars will end. Home purchases will fall even further than before because of the extreme hike in travel expenses required for families to move.

11) Russia will threaten to limit or cut off all natural gas exports to the EU if they attempt to join with the U.S. in aggression against Syria. The EU will comply due to their dependency on Russian energy.

12) Russia will position naval forces in the Mediterranean to place pressure on the U.S. I feel the possibility of Russia initiating direct confrontation with the U.S. is limited, mainly because countries like Russia and China do not need to engage the U.S. through force of arms in order to strike a painful blow.

13) China and Russia will finally announce their decision to drop the dollar completely as the world reserve currency. A process which already began back in 2005, and which global banks have been fully aware of for years.

14) Because of China’s position as the number one exporter and importer in the world, many nations will follow suit in dumping the dollar in bilateral trade. The dollar’s value will implode. China, Russia, and the war in Syria will be blamed, and global banks including the Federal Reserve will be ignored as the true culprits.

15) The combination of high energy prices and a devaluing dollar will strike retail prices hard. Expect a doubling of prices on all goods. Look for many imported goods to begin disappearing from shelves.

16) Homelessness will expand exponentially as cuts to welfare programs, including food stamps, are made inevitable. However, welfare will not disappear, it will merely be “adjusted” to fit different goals. The homeless themselves will be treated like criminals. The roaming bands of jobless drifters common during the Great Depression will not exist during a modern crisis. State and Federal agencies will pursue an “out of sight, out of mind” policy towards the indigent, forcing them into “aid shelters” or other bureaucratic contraptions designed to conditioning the homeless to accept refugee status, making them totally dependent on federal scraps, but also prisoners on federally designated camps.

17) Terrorist attacks (false flag or otherwise) will spread like wildfire. Israel is highly susceptible. The U.S. may see a string of attacks, including cyber attacks on infrastructure. Syria and it’s supporters will be blamed regardless of evidence. The White House will begin broad institution of authoritarian powers, including continuity of government executive orders, the Patriot Act, the NDAA, etc.

18) Martial Law may not even be officially declared, but the streets of America will feel like martial law none the less.

19) False paradigms will flood the mainstream as the establishment seeks to divide American citizens. The conflict will be painted as Muslim against Christian, black against white, poor against rich (but not the super rich elites, of course). Liberty Movement activists will be labeled “traitors” for “undermining government credibility” during a time of crisis. The Neo-Conservatives will place all blame on Barack Obama. Neo-Liberals will blame conservatives as “divisive”. Liberty Movement activists will point out that both sides are puppets of the same international cabal, and be labeled “traitors” again. The establishment will try to coax Americans into turning their rage on each other.

20) The Homeland Security apparatus will be turned completely inward, focusing entirely on “domestic enemies”. The domain of the TSA will be expanded onto highways and city streets. Local police will be fully federalized. Northcom will field soldiers within U.S. border to deal with more resistant quarters of the country. Totalitarianism will become the norm.

What Can We Do Right Now?

The level of collapse, I suspect, will not be total. The government is not going to disappear, rather, it will become more dominant in its posture. Certain sections of the country will be maintained while others fall apart. The IMF will move in to “help” the ailing U.S. economy by tying funding to the SDR (Special Drawing Rights). America’s economy will be absorbed by the IMF. Constitutional protections will be fully erased in the name of reestablishing “law and order”, with the promise that the loss of our civil liberties is “only temporary”.

If the U.S. strikes Syria, and refuses to disengage, these things WILL happen. So, the next question is what can we do about it?

1) Given that this crisis is going to be riding a wave of extremely high energy prices, every single Liberty Movement activist (and every American for that matter) should be stockpiling energy reserves. Motor oil, gasoline (with gas saver), diesel fuel, propane, etc. should be at the top of your list right now. A generator should be next. Prices are only going to rise from here on out. Buy reserves now, before it is too late.

2) Everyone in the Liberty Movement should have at least minimal solar power capability. A couple of 100 watt panels, an inverter, a charge controller, and two-four deep cycle batteries can be had for under $1000. You may not be able to run your house on it, but you can at least charge important electronics, run a well pump, run some lights, a security system, etc.

3) The internet as we know it will no longer exist. The White House will apply preexisting executive orders on U.S. communications to restrict internet use, or, a convenient cyber attack will take place, opening the door for federal controls. The web will likely still operate, but only as a shell of its former greatness. Certain sites and email providers will be designated “safe”, while others will be designated “unsafe”. This leaves a gaping hole in our society’s ability to communicate information quickly and efficiently, and, it removes the alternative media from the picture. The best solution I can present for this problem is Ham Radio, which is very difficult for the establishment to shut down. Ham Radio communication chains could take the place of the internet as a lower-tech but useful means of spreading information across the country. In the next few months, EVERYONE in the Liberty Movement should have a Ham Radio set, or handheld model, and they should know how to use it.

4) Harden your home during the next few months. Place security bars on windows, and replace weak doors with steel core doors. An internal lock bar will still frustrate entry by those who might blast hinges. Add a fire suppression system for good measure. This might sound like overkill, but if you want to be able to sleep at night during such an event, you must make your home your castle. No one should be able to enter your house without your permission.

5) Learn a useful trade right now. If you don’t already know how to produce or fix a necessary item or commodity, take the next six months to learn how. If you don’t know how to teach a valuable skill, get to work. Barter and trade will become the primary method of economy during a dollar collapse. Make sure you are sought after within your local economy.

6) Cache items before winter begins. Do not assume you will be able to stay on your homestead indefinitely. There are no guarantees during collapse. A wildfire could reduce your neighborhood to ashes in hours. Your home could be overrun. Make sure you have secondary supplies in a safe location just in case.

7) Find two friends (or more) right now that are willing to coordinate with you in the event that the worst happens. This means mutual aid and defense. This means predetermined arrangements for supplies, communications, meeting spots, and security. Do it now. Do not wait until our situation worsens.

8) Buy six months worth of food over the course of the next two months. Bulk food, freeze dried, MRE’s, whatever. Just buy it. Have a lot of food already? I don’t care. Buy six more months of supplies now. You’ll thank me later.

9) Cultivate nutrient rich soil before winter begins. Buy a truckload of planting soil and manure and create a garden space if you have not already. Purchase extensive seed storage. Compile books on growing methods.

10) Gauge the temperament of your neighborhood. If all of your neighbors are mindless brain eating zombies, then perhaps it would be better to share a home with a prepared family member in another region now. If not, then start a neighborhood watch. Two or three families working together is far stronger than only one, and can change the temperament of an entire block of homes.

11) Train for tactical movement over the next three months. Learn how to move, shoot, and communicate as a team. Learn your strengths and weaknesses today or suffer the consequences tomorrow.

12) Prepare yourself mentally for conflict and self defense. Sign up for at least six months of hand to hand defense training. Learn how to deal with the mental and emotional strain of another person trying to harm you. Get used to the idea, because where we’re headed, someone, at some point, will probably want to do you in. Always maintain your conscience and your principles, but never allow yourself to become a victim.

The Tension Is Palpable

As I have said many times before, a fight is coming. There is no way around it. But this fight must be fought intelligently, and we must never forget who the REAL enemy is.

If a revolution ensues and Obama loses control, the establishment could simply trigger a Neo-Con or military coup in order to placate the masses and fool Constitutionalists into believing they have been saved. Useless solutions will be presented to the people, including new leadership composed of more old guard elitists, a disastrous Constitutional Convention, or limited secession (which will never be honored by the establishment anyway). The purpose of these false solutions will be to fool you into relaxing your vigilance, distracting you from seeking justice against globalist organizations, or, to redirect your energies away from self sufficient communities, counties, and states, ready to dispel aggressive establishment elements.

Beware of those who grasp too readily for leadership over you. Real leaders stand as teachers, not oligarchs, and rarely do they take on the role without considerable reservations. Never trust anyone who does not immediately back their promises with tangible action. And, never forget that we fight not just for the removal of one particular tyrant, but for Constitutional liberty itself. One must follow the other, or there has been no victory.

Though it is depressingly difficult to see in times like these, there is indeed good in this world. There are ideals, and aspirations, and visions, and loves worth standing up for, worth fighting for, and worth dying for. There is still a future worth striving for at the end of the long night. There are dreams here, in the hearts of men, worth realizing. We do not necessarily battle for what humanity is, but for what we have the potential to become. The tides of society may shift and storm, the chaos may become unbearable, and the world may tear apart until it is unrecognizable. The agents of dominion believe they are the only constant, but there is another. In time, the dim pale of tyranny will always break in the light of freedom’s resolute. Get ready, honorable Liberty Movement, our work has just begun.

You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com. Alt-Market.com is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

The first thing I learned as a child is to not depend on anyone but myself, so out of necessity, I have acquired most of the skills needed to repair or build those things needed to survive. Those people who cannot even tie a useful knot in a rope, or select the right tool for a given task will be at the mercy of others they never heard of before, and if past experience is worth repeating, I’m sure those types of people will try to tell everyone else what to do. If you have no mechanical aptitude, keep your mouth shut and gracefully accept help from those few who will offer it. There will not be many willing to help strangers with a smart mouth, and dumb brain so show your appreciation. Most American’s have never dreamed of what we will be going through, so be prepared for the worst you can imagine. Your government is the enemy, the Bankers who caused all of this are their masters. Good luck America!

If you believe in prayer, now is a good time to exercise your knees.

10 13 11 flagbar


22 Reasons Why Starting World War 3 In The Middle East Is A Really Bad Idea

08/29/2013

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/22-reasons-why-starting-world-war-3-in-the-middle-east-is-a-really-bad-idea

10-18-2011 7-10-19 PM

By Michael Snyder

While most of the country is obsessing over Miley Cyrus, the Obama administration is preparing a military attack against Syria which has the potential of starting World War 3.  In fact, it is being reported that cruise missile strikes could begin “as early as Thursday“.  The Obama administration is pledging that the strikes will be “limited”, but what happens when the Syrians fight back?  What happens if they sink a U.S. naval vessel or they have agents start hitting targets inside the United States?  Then we would have a full-blown war on our hands.  And what happens if the Syrians decide to retaliate by hitting Israel?  If Syrian missiles start raining down on Tel Aviv, Israel will be extremely tempted to absolutely flatten Damascus, and they are more than capable of doing precisely that.  And of course Hezbollah and Iran are not likely to just sit idly by as their close ally Syria is battered into oblivion.  We are looking at a scenario where the entire Middle East could be set aflame, and that might only be just the beginning.  Russia and China are sternly warning the U.S. government not to get involved in Syria, and by starting a war with Syria we will do an extraordinary amount of damage to our relationships with those two global superpowers.  Could this be the beginning of a chain of events that could eventually lead to a massive global conflict with Russia and China on one side and the United States on the other?  Of course it will not happen immediately, but I fear that what is happening now is setting the stage for some really bad things.  The following are 22 reasons why starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea…

#1 The American people are overwhelmingly against going to war with Syria…

Americans strongly oppose U.S. intervention in Syria’s civil war and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports that Syria’s government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are confirmed, a Reuters/Ipsos poll says.

About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria’s civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.

#2 At this point, a war in Syria is even more unpopular with the American people than Congress is.

#3 The Obama administration has not gotten approval to go to war with Syria from Congressas the U.S. Constitution requires.

#4 The United States does not have the approval of the United Nations to attack Syria and it is not going to be getting it.

#5 Syria has said that it will use “all means available” to defend itself if the United States attacks.  Would that include terror attacks in the United States itself?

#6 Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem made the following statement on Tuesday

“We have two options: either to surrender, or to defend ourselves with the means at our disposal. The second choice is the best: we will defend ourselves”

#7 Russia has just sent their most advanced anti-ship missiles to Syria.  What do you think would happen if images of sinking U.S. naval vessels were to come flashing across our television screens?

#8 When the United States attacks Syria, there is a very good chance that Syria will attack Israel.  Just check out what one Syrian official said recently

A member of the Syrian Ba’ath national council Halef al-Muftah, until recently the Syrian propaganda minister’s aide, said on Monday that Damascus views Israel as “behind the aggression and therefore it will come under fire” should Syria be attacked by the United States.

In an interview for the American radio station Sawa in Arabic, President Bashar Assad‘s fellow party member said: “We have strategic weapons and we can retaliate. Essentially, the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel.”

Al-Muftah stressed that the US’s threats will not influence the Syrain regime and added that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”

#9 If Syria attacks Israel, the consequences could be absolutely catastrophic.  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is promising that any attack will be responded to “forcefully“…

“We are not a party to this civil war in Syria but if we identify any attempt to attack us we will respond and we will respond forcefully”

#10 Hezbollah will likely do whatever it can to fight for the survival of the Assad regime.  That could include striking targets inside both the United States and Israel.

#11 Iran’s closest ally is Syria.  Will Iran sit idly by as their closest ally is removed from the chessboard?

#12 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with Russia.  On Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that the West is acting like a “monkey with a hand grenade“.

#13 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with China.  And what will happen if the Chinese decide to start dumping the massive amount of U.S. debt that it is holding?  Interest rates would absolutely skyrocket and we would rapidly be facing a nightmare scenario.

#14 Dr. Jerome Corsi and Walid Shoebat have compiled some startling evidence that it was actually the Syrian rebels that the U.S. is supporting that were responsible for the chemical weapons attack that is being used as justification to go to war with Syria…

With the assistance of former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat, WND has assembled evidence from various Middle Eastern sources that cast doubt on Obama administration claims the Assad government is responsible for last week’s attack.

You can examine the evidence for yourself right here.

#15 As Pat Buchanan recently noted, it would have made absolutely no sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons on defenseless women and children.  The only people who would benefit from such an attack would be the rebels…

The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?

To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.

The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war.

#16 If the Saudis really want to topple the Assad regime, they should do it themselves.  They should not expect the United States to do their dirty work for them.

#17 A former commander of U.S. Central Command has said that a U.S. attack on Syria would result in “a full-throated, very, very serious war“.

#18 A war in the Middle East will be bad for the financial markets.  The Dow was down about 170 points today and concern about war with Syria was the primary reason.

#19 A war in the Middle East will cause the price of oil to go up.  On Tuesday, the price of U.S. oil rose to about $109 a barrel.

#20 There is no way in the world that the U.S. government should be backing the Syrian rebels.  As I discussed a few days ago, the rebels have pledged loyalty to al-Qaeda, they have beheaded numerous Christians and they have massacred entire Christian villages.  If the U.S. government helps these lunatics take power in Syria it will be a complete and utter disaster.

#21 A lot of innocent civilians inside Syria will end up getting killed.  Already, a lot of Syriansare expressing concern about what “foreign intervention” will mean for them and their families…

“I’ve always been a supporter of foreign intervention, but now that it seems like a reality, I’ve been worrying that my family could be hurt or killed,” said one woman, Zaina, who opposes Assad. “I’m afraid of a military strike now.”

“The big fear is that they’ll make the same mistakes they made in Libya and Iraq,” said Ziyad, a man in his 50s. “They’ll hit civilian targets, and then they’ll cry that it was by mistake, but we’ll get killed in the thousands.”

#22 If the U.S. government insists on going to war with Syria without the approval of the American people, the U.S. Congress or the United Nations, we are going to lose a lot of friends and a lot of credibility around the globe.  It truly is a sad day when Russia looks like “the good guys” and we look like “the bad guys”.

What good could possibly come out of getting involved in Syria?  As I wrote about the other day, the “rebels” that Obama is backing are rabidly anti-Christian, rabidly anti-Israel and rabidly anti-western.  If they take control of Syria, that nation will be far more unstable and far more of a hotbed for terrorism than it is now.

And the downside of getting involved in Syria is absolutely enormous.  Syria, Iran and Hezbollah all have agents inside this country, and if they decide to start blowing stuff up that will wake up the American people to the horror of war really quick.  And by attacking Syria, the United States could cause a major regional war to erupt in the Middle East which could eventually lead to World War 3.

I don’t know about you, but I think that starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea.

Let us hope that cooler heads prevail before things spin totally out of control.

 10 13 11 flagbar


Here is what happened to the Constitution and our Bill of Rights!

08/28/2013

http://anticorruptionsociety.com/2013/08/27/here-is-what-happened-to-the-constitution-and-our-bill-of-rights/#more-8670

 IN 1933 THERE WAS A COUP IN AMERICA AND ALL LAWYERS (and politicians?) ARE SWORN TO KEEP KNOWLEDGE OF IT FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC!!

As long as the “President” declares a war or a national emergency, he and his army of unconstitutional agencies can maintain the appearance of power and control over the entire population. During wartime (or a national emergency) “We the People” are considered to be enemies of the state. As ‘enemies’ the President can determine what we can and cannot do. This is not conjecture nor conspiracy theory, it is a well researched and documented fact – per a United States Senate report of 1973. In full below.

From the Special Report on the National Emergency in the United States of America:

Once the emergency is declared, the common law is abolished, the Constitution is abolished and we fall under the absolute will of Government “public policy”. We’re under a system of public policy, (War Powers).

All the government needs to continue is to have public opinion on their side. If public opinion can be kept, in sufficient degree, on the side of the government, statutes, laws and regulations can continue to be passed. The Constitution has no meaning. The Constitution is suspended. It has been for over 60 years. We’re not under law. Law has been abolished.

So when you go into that courtroom with your Constitution and the common law in your hand, what does that judge tell you? He tells you that you have no persona standi in judicio. You have no personal standing at law. He tells you not to bother bringing the Constitution into his court, because it is not a Constitutional court, but an executive tribunal operating under a totally different jurisdiction.

In Senate Report 93-549, we find the following statement from Congress (Exhibit 55):

 ”Furthermore, it would be largely futile task unless we have the President’s active collaboration. Having delegated this authority to the President — in ways that permit him to determine how long it shall continue, simply through the device of keeping emergency declarations alive — we now find ourselves in a position where we cannot reclaim the power without the President’s acquiescence. We are unable to terminate these declarations without the President’s signature, so we need a large measure of Presidential cooperation”.

For many years we had a “cold war”, then we had a “war on drugs” and a “war on poverty”. Yet, the epidemic of illegal drugs has never improved one iota, nor has poverty been eliminated.

The latest Presidential scam is The War on Terror

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld restated the need for a decades long “War on Terror”:
“This is much more like the Cold War,” he [Rumsfeld] told Newsmax. “It’s going to last decades, not years . . . “

Since, “All the government needs to continue is to have public opinion on their side. If public opinion can be kept, in sufficient degree, on the side of the government, statutes, laws and regulations can continue to be passed.”

It is time to turn public opinion against this bogus ‘government’ and all of its agencies. The men who serve as President don’t work for the people. As long as there is a war or state of emergency We the People will remain the President’s enemy. The man posing as President is merely the CEO of USA INC, because our ‘government’ is just another corporation. And lastly those hiding behind the facade of legitimate government are actively and aggressively waging their own declared war AGAINST We the People of America.

MUST READ:

Our Government is Just Another Corporation

Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars

Senate Report 93-549, War and Emergency Powers Acts

 

A Special Report on the National Emergency in the United States of America

Senate Report 93-549

War and Emergency Powers Acts,
Executive Orders and the New World Order

From data available on the web.

The Introduction to Senate Report 93-549 (93rd Congress, 1st Session, 1973) summarizes the situation that we face today – except it is far worse today than it was in 1973 !!


“A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years [now 66 years], freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency. The problem of how a constitutional democracy reacts to great crises, however, far antedates the Great Depression. As a philosophical issue, its origins reach back to the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. And, in the United States, actions taken by the Government in times of great crises have – from, at least, the Civil War – in important ways, shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency.”


The Foreword to the Report states in part –


“Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four presidentially proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the national emergency declared by President Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the national emergency proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971.

These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law [hundreds more since 1973, particularly in the Clinton administration since Jan 21, 1993]. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal Constitutional processes.

Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.”


When the Southern states walked out of Congress on March 27, 1861, the quorum to conduct business under the Constitution was lost. The only votes that Congress could lawfully take, under Parliamentary Law, were those to set the time to reconvene, take a vote to get a quorum, and vote to adjourn and set a date, time, and place to reconvene at a later time, but instead, Congress abandoned the House and Senate without setting a date to reconvene. Under the parliamentary law of Congress, when this happened, Congress became sine die (pronounced see-na dee-a; literally “without day”) and thus when Congress adjourned sine die, it ceased to exist as a lawful deliberative body, and the only lawful, constitutional power that could declare war was no longer lawful, or in session.

The Southern states, by virtue of their secession from the Union, also ceased to exist sine die, and some state legislatures in the Northern bloc also adjourned sine die, and thus, all the states which were parties to creating the Constitution ceased to exist. President Lincoln executed the first executive order written by any President on April 15, 1861, Executive Order 1, and the nation has been ruled by the President under executive order ever since. When Congress eventually did reconvene, it was reconvened under the military authority of the Commander-in-Chief and not by Rules of Order for Parliamentary bodies or by Constitutional Law; placing the American people under martial rule ever since that national emergency declared by President Lincoln. The Constitution for the United States of America temporarily ceased to be the law of the land, and the President, Congress, and the Courts unlawfully presumed that they were free to remake the nation in their own image, whereas, lawfully, no constitutional provisions were in place which afforded power to any of the actions which were taken which presumed to place the nation under the new form of control.

President Lincoln knew that he had no authority to issue any executive order, and thus he commissioned General Orders No. 100 (April 24, 1863) as a special field code to govern his actions under martial law and which justified the seizure of power, which extended the laws of the District of Columbia, and which fictionally implemented the provisions of Article I, Section 8, Clauses 17-18 of the Constitution beyond the boundaries of Washington, D.C. and into the several states. General Orders No. 100, also called the Lieber Instructions and the Lieber Code, extended The Laws of War and International Law onto American soil, and the United States government became the presumed conqueror of the people and the land.

Martial rule was kept secret and has never ended, the nation has been ruled under Military Law by the Commander of Chief of that military; the President, under his assumed executive powers and according to his executive orders. Constitutional law under the original Constitution is enforced only as a matter of keeping the public peace under the provisions of General Orders No. 100 under martial rule. Under Martial Law, title is a mere fiction, since all property belongs to the military except for that property which the Commander-in-Chief may, in his benevolence, exempt from taxation and seizure and upon which he allows the enemy to reside.

President Lincoln was assassinated before he could complete plans for reestablishing constitutional government in the Southern States and end the martial rule by executive order, and the 14th Article in Amendment to the Constitution created a new citizenship status for the new expanded jurisdiction. New laws for the District of Columbia were established and passed by Congress in 1871, supplanting those established Feb. 27, 1801 and May 3, 1802. The District of Columbia was re-incorporated in 1872, and all states in the Union were reformed as Franchisees of the Federal Corporation so that a new Union of the United States could be created. The key to when the states became Federal Franchisees is related to the date when such states enacted the Field Code in law. The Field Code was a codification of the common law that was adopted first by New York and then by California in 1872, and shortly afterwards the Lieber Code was used to bring the United States into the 1874 Brussels Conference and into the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.

In 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917) was passed and which defined, regulated and punished trading with enemies, who were then required by that act to be licensed by the government to do business. The National Banking System Act (Public Law 73-1, 73rd Congress, Session I, Chapter 1, March 9, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2038 (March 6, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2039 (March 9, 1933), and Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and 6260 prove that in 1933, the United States Government formed under the executive privilege of the original martial rule went bankrupt, and a new state of national emergency was declared under which United States citizens were named as the enemy to the government and the banking system as per the provisions of the Trading with the Enemy Act. The legal system provided for in the Constitution was formally changed in 1938 through the Supreme Court decision in the case of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 US 64, 82 L.Ed. 1188.

On April 25, 1938, the Supreme Court overturned the standing precedents of the prior 150 years concerning “COMMON LAW” in the federal government.

THERE IS NO FEDERAL COMMON LAW, AND CONGRESS HAS NO POWER TO DECLARE SUBSTANTIVE RULES OF COMMON LAW applicable IN A STATE, WHETHER they be LOCAL or GENERAL in their nature, be they COMMERCIAL LAW or a part of LAW OF TORTS.” (See: ERIE RAILROAD CO. vs. THOMPKINS, 304 U.S. 64, 82 L. Ed. 1188)

The significance is that since the Erie Decision, no cases are allowed to be cited that are prior to 1938. There can be no mixing of the old law with the new law. The Common Law is the fountain source of Substantive and Remedial Rights, if not our very Liberties. (See also: Who is Running America?)

In 1945 the United States gave up any remaining national sovereignty when it signed the United Nations Treaty, making all American citizens subject to United Nations jurisdiction. The “constitution” of the United Nations may be compared to that of the old Soviet Union.

Documentation –

Executive Order 1 – http://www.historyplace.com/lincoln/proc-1.htm;

General Orders No. 100 (April 24, 1863) “Lieber Code” –
http://www.tufts.edu/departments/fletcher/multi/texts/historical/LIEBER-CODE.txt;
[Editorial note (8/30/2011): The above link no longer exists. The following may provide an alternative source: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/110?OpenDocument.]

Senate Report 93-549 (93rd Congress, 1st Session, 1973) –
http://www.barefootsworld.net/war_ep1.html;

The Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917);

National Banking System Act (Public Law 73-1, 73rd Congress, Session I, Chapter 1, March 9, 1933);

Executive Proclamation 2038 (March 6, 1933); Executive Proclamation 2039 (March 9, 1933);

Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and 6260;

Title 12 USC, Section 95a – http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/12/95.html;

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 US 64, 82 L.Ed. 1188;

and the United Nations Treaty.

All documentation is available through your local government document repository library branch or at the Library of Congress.

Observations – Arguments which suggest that the Treaty of Paris of 1783 was not a lawful or legal treaty of peace between warring nations and that the American Colonies never really attained or obtained lawful or legal sovereignty, must also presume, by their own argument, that the Constitution for the united States of America and the Bill of Rights were never organic documents of true lawful or legal standing.

Conclusion – The Constitution for the united States of America and the Bill of Rights are no longer in effect in their original form or where they conflict with the United Nations Treaty and other international agreements. Citizens of the several States of the Union who were formerly sovereigns protected by the common law are now United States citizens and are thus subjects to International Admiralty jurisdiction.


Now that you know what you are up against, I hope the above data and the linked Senate Report 93-549 causes you to see red, pisses you off enough to start thinking and doing something about it. I am fighting for my freedom and my country, to defend and restore the Constitution, our Nation’s Sovereignty, Your Sovereignty, and Mine.

Are You??

Reproduction of all or any parts of the above text may be used for general information.

This HTML presentation is copyright by Barefoot, June 1996

A Special Report on the National Emergency in the United States of America

Senate Report 93-549

War and Emergency Powers Acts

From data available on the web.

93d Congress
1stSession

}

Senate

{

Report
No. 93-549

EMERGENCY POWERS STATUTES:

PROVISIONS OF FEDERAL LAW
NOW IN EFFECT DELEGATING TO THE
EXECUTIVE EXTRAORDINARY AUTHORITY
IN TIME OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY


REPORT
OF THE
SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE
TERMINATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY
UNITED STATES SENATE

NOVEMBER 19, 1973

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1973
24-509 O

I

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE

TERMINATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY

FRANK CHURCH, Idaho Co-Chairman
PHILIP A. HART, Michigan
CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island
ADLAI E. STEVENSON III, Illinois

CHARLES McC MATHIAS, Jr., Maryland
CLIFFORD P. CASE, New Jersey
JAMES B. PEARSON, Kansas
CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Wyoming

WILLIAM G. MILLER, Staff Director
THOMAS A. DINE, Professional Staff

FOREWORD

 Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four providentially-proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the national emergency declared by President Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the national emergency proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971.

These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal Constitutional processes.

Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may:
seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.

With the melting of the cold war–the developing detente with the Soviet Union and China, the stable truce of over 20 years duration between North and South Korea, and the end of U.S. involvement in the war in Indochina-there is no present need for the United States Government to continue to function under emergency conditions.

The Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency was created1to examine the consequences of terminating the declared states of national emergency that now prevail; to recommend what steps the Congress should take to ensure that the termination can be accomplished without adverse effect upon the necessary tasks of governing; and, also, to recommend ways in which the United States can meet future emergency situations with speed and effectiveness but without relinquishment of congressional oversight and control.

In accordance with this mandate, the Special Committee-in conjunction with the Executive branch, expert constitutional authorities, as well as former high officials of this Government-is now engaged

Note 1: S. Res. 9, 93d Cong., 1st Sess.

in a detailed study to determine the most reasonable ways to restore normalcy to the operations of our Government.

A first and necessary step was to bring together the body of statutes, which have been passed by Congress, conferring extraordinary powers upon the Executive branch in times of national emergency.

This has been a most difficult task. Nowhere in the Government, in either the Executive or Legislative branches, did there exist a complete catalog of all emergency statutes. Many were aware that there had been a delegation of an enormous amount of power but, of how much power, no one knew. In order to correct this situation, the Special Committee staff was instructed to work with the Executive branch, the Library of Congress, and knowledgeable legal authorities to compile an authoritative list of delegated emergency powers.

This Special Committee study, which contains a list of all provisions of Federal law, except the most trivial, conferring extraordinary powers in time of national emergency, was compiled by the staff under the direction of Staff Director William G. Miller, and Mr. Thomas A. Dine; utilizing the help of the General Accounting Office, the American Law Division of the Library of Congress, the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, and the Office of Emergency Planning.

The Special Committee is grateful for the assistance provided by Jack. Goldklang of the Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice; Lester S. Jayson, the director of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress; Joseph E. Ross, head of the American Law Division of CRS; and especially Raymond Celada of the Ameri- can Law Division and his able assistants, Charles V. Dale and Grover S. Williams; Paul Armstrong of the General Accounting Office; Linda Lee, Patrick Norton, Roland Moore, William K. Sawyer, Audrey Hatry, Martha Mecham, and David J. Kyte.

The Special Committee will also publish a list of Executive Orders, issued pursuant to statutes brought into force by declared states of emergency, at a later date.

CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR.
FRANK CHURCH,
Co-Chairmen.

93d Congress
1stSession

}

Senate

{

Report
No. 93-549

EMERGENCY POWERS STATUTES:
PROVISIONS OF FEDERAL LAW
NOW IN EFFECT DELEGATING TO THE
EXECUTIVE EXTRAORDINARY AUTHORITY
IN TIME OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY


November 19, 1973. – Ordered to be printed

Mr. MATHIAS (for Mr. CHURCH) as co-chairman of the Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency, submitted the following

REPORT
[Pursuant to S. Res. 9, 93d Cong.]
INTRODUCTION

A – A BRIEF HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE ORIGINS

OF EMERGENCY POWERS NOW IN FORCE

A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency. The problem of how a constitutional democracy reacts to great crises, however, far antedates the Great Depression. As a philosophical issue, its origins reach back to the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. And, in the United States, actions taken by the Government in times of great crises have-from, at least, the Civil War-in important ways, shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency.

American political theory of emergency government was derived and enlarged from John Locke, the English political-philosopher whose thought influenced the authors of the Constitution. Locke argued that the threat of national crisis-unforeseen, sudden, and potentially catastrophic-required the creation of broad executive

(1)

 emergency powers to be exercised by the Chief Executive in situations where the legislative authority had not provided a means or procedure of remedy. Referring to emergency power in the 14th chapter of his Second Treatise on Civil Government as “prerogative”; Locke suggested that it:

…should be left to the discretion of him that has the executive power…since in some governments the lawmaking power is not always in being and is usually too numerous, and so too slow for the dispatch requisite to executions, and because, also it is impossible to foresee and so by laws to provide for all accidents and necessities that may concern the public, or make such laws as will do no harm, if they are executed with an inflexible rigour on all occasions and upon all persons that may come in their way, therefore there is a latitude left to the executive power to do many things of choice; which the laws do not prescribe.

To what extent the Founding Fathers adhered to this view of the executive role in emergencies is a much disputed issue. Whatever their conceptions of this role, its development in practice has been based largely on the manner in which individual President’s have viewed their office and its functions. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft argued the proper role of the President and, perhaps, their debate best expounds diametrically-opposed philosophies of the presidency. In his autobiography, Roosevelt asserted his “stewardship theory.”

My view was that every Executive officer…was a steward of the people bound actively and affirmatively to do all he could for the people and not to content himself with the negative merit of keeping his talents undamaged in a napkin…My belief was that it was not only [the President’s] right but his duty to do any thing that the needs of the Nation demanded unless such action was forbidden by the Constitution or by the laws. Under this interpretation of executive power I did and caused to be done many things not previously done by the President and the heads of departments. I did not usurp power but I did greatly broaden the use of executive power. In other words, I acted for the common well being of all our people whenever and whatever measure was necessary, unless prevented by direct constitutional or legislative prohibition.

Roosevelt compared this principle of “stewardship” to what he called the Jackson-Lincoln theory, and contrasted it to the theory ascribed to William Howard Taft.

Roosevelt’s ideas on the limit of presidential authority and responsibility were vigorously disputed by Taft. In lectures on the presidency–delivered at Columbia University in 1915-1916-Taft responded that: “. . . the wide field of action that this would give to the Executive one can hardly limit. A President can exercise no power which cannot fairly and reasonably be traced to some specific grant of power.” And he cautioned that: “. . . such specific grants must be

(2)

either in the Federal Constitution, or in any act of Congress passed in pursuance thereof. There is no undefined residuum of power which he can exercise because it seems to him to be in the public interest.”

In recent years, most scholars have interpreted the Roosevelt-Taft dispute in Roosevelt’s favor. In the prevailing academic view, Roosevelt is described as “active”, “expansionist”, and “strong.” The historical reality, in fact, does not afford such a sharp distinction either between the actions of these two Presidents, or between their analysis of the problem of emergency powers. Taft, in his concluding remarks to his Columbia lectures, said : “Executive power is limited, so far as it is possible to limit such a power consistent with that discretion and promptness of action that are essential to preserve the interests of the public in times of emergency or legislative neglect or inaction.” Thus, even Taft was disposed to employ emergency power when the need arose, but, he did not wish to go beyond his own narrower, conservative conception of what was meant by constitutional and legal bounds. Thus, the dispute was over where those bounds lay, rather than the nature of the office itself.

Taft’s successor, Woodrow Wilson, was no less zealous in observing what he thought the Constitution demanded. Faced with the exigencies of World War I, Wilson found it necessary to expand executive emergency powers enormously. In many respects, this expansion ofpowers in wartime was based on precedents set by Lincoln decades earlier. Unlike Lincoln, however, Wilson relied heavily on Congress for official delegations of authority no matter how broadly these might be.

Wilson’s exercise of power in the First World War provided a model for future Presidents and their advisors. During the preparedeness period of 1915-1916, the submarine crisis in the opening months of 1917, and the period of direct involvement of U.S. armed forces from April 1917 to November 1918, Wilson utilized powers as sweeping as Lincoln’s. Because governmental agencies were more highly organized and their jurisdictions wider, presidential powers were considerably more effective than ever before. Yet, perhaps, because of Wilson’s scrupulous attention to obtaining prior congressional concurrence there was only one significant congressional challenge to Wilson’s wartime measures.

That challenge came in February-March 1917, following the severance of diplomatic relations with Germany. A group of Senators successfully filibustered a bill authorizing the arming of American merchant ships. In response–records American historian Frank Freidel in his book Roosevelt: the Apprenticeship – Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin D. Roosevelt found an old statute under which the President could proceed without fresh authorization from Congress. Roosevelt, impatient for action, was irritated because Wilson waited a few days before implementing the statute.

Lincoln had drawn most heavily upon his power as Commander-in-Chief; Wilson exercised emergency power on the basis of old statutes and sweeping new legislation–thus drawing on congressional delegation as a source of authority: The most significant Wilsonian innovations were economic, including a wide array of defense and war agencies, modeled to some extent upon British wartime

(3)

precedents. In August 1916 just prior to the United States entry into the war, Congress at Wilson’s behest established a Council of National Defense-primarily advisory. In 1917, a War Industries Board, also relatively weak, began operating. The ineffectiveness of the economic mobilization led Republicans in Congress – in the winter of 1917-1918 to demand a coalition War Cabinet similar to that in England. Wilson forestalled Congress by proposing legislation delegating him almost total economic power and, even before legislative approval, authorized the War Industries Board to exercise extensive powers. Subsequently Congress enacted Wilson’s measure, the Overman Act, in April 1918. Other legislation extended the economic authority of the Government in numerous directions.

Following the allied victory, Wilson relinquished his wartime authority and asked Congress to repeal the emergency statutes, enacted to fight more effectively the war. Only a food-control measure and the 1917 Trading With the Enemy Act were retained. This procedure of terminating emergency powers when the particular emergency itself has, in fact, ended has not been consistently followed by his successors.

The next major development in the use of executive emergency powers came under Franklin D. RooseveIt. The Great Depression had already overtaken the country by the time of Roosevelt’s inauguration and confronted him with a totally different crisis. This emergency, unlike those of the past, presented a nonmilitary threat. The Roosevelt administration, however, conceived the economic crisis to be a calamity equally as great as a war and employed the metaphor of war to emphasize the depression’s severity. In his inaugural address, Roosevelt said: “I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis–broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.”

Many of the members of the Roosevelt administration, including F.D.R. himself, were veterans of the economic mobilization of World War I and drew upon their experiences to combat the new situation. The first New Deal agencies, indeed, bore strong resemblance to wartime agencies and many had the term “emergency” in their titles-such as the Federal Emergency Relief Administration and the National Emergency Council.

In his first important official act, Roosevelt proclaimed a National Bank Holiday on the basis of the 1917 Trading With the Enemy Act – itself a wartime delegation of power. New Deal historian William E. Leuchtenburg writes:

When he sent his banking bill to Congress, the House received it with much the same ardor as it had greeted Woodrow Wilson’s war legislation. Speaker Rainey said the situation reminded him of the late war when “on both sides of this Chamber the great war measures suggested by the administration were supported with practical unanimity….Today we are engaged in another war, more serious even in its character and presenting greater dangers to the Republic.” After only 38 minutes debate, the House passed the administration’s banking bill, sight unseen.

(4)

The Trading With the Enemy Act had, however, been specifically designed by its originators to meet only wartime exigencies. By employing it to meet the demands of the depression, Roosevelt greatly extended the concept of “emergencies” to which expansion of executive powers might be applied. And in so doing, he established a pattern that was followed frequently: In time of crisis the President should utilize any statutory authority readily at hand, regardless of its original purposes, with the firm expectation of ex post facto congressional concurrence.

Beginning with F.D.R., then, extensive use of delegated powers exercised under an aura of crisis has become a dominant aspect of the presidency. Concomitant with this development has been a demeaning of the significance of “emergency.” It became a term used to evoke public and congressional approbation, often bearing little actual relation to events. Roosevelt brain-truster, Rexford G. Tugwell, has described the manner in which Roosevelt used declarations of diferent degrees of emergency:

The “limited emergency” was a creature of Roosevelt’s imagination, used to make it seem that he was doing less than he was. He did not want to create any more furor than was necessary. The qualifying adjective had no limiting force. It was purely for public effect. But the finding that an emergency existed opened a whole armory of powers to the Commander-in-Chief, far more than Wilson had had.

Roosevelt and his successor, Harry S. Truman, invoked formal states of emergency to justify extensive delegations of authority during actual times of war. The Korean war, however, by the fact of its never having been officially declared a “war” as such by Congress, further diluted the concept of what constituted circumstances sufficiently critical to warrant the delegation of extraordinary authority to the President.

At the end of the Korean war, moreover, the official state of emergency was not terminated. It is not yet terminated. This may be primarily attributed to the continuance of the Cold War atmosphere which, until recent years, made the imminent threat of hostilities an accepted fact of everyday life, with “emergency” the normal state of affairs. In this, what is for all practical purposes, permanent state of emergency, Presidents have exercised numerous powers – most notably under the Trading With the Enemy Act – legitimated by that ongoing state of national emergency. Hundreds of others have lain fallow, there to be exercised at any time, requiring only an order from the President.

Besides the 1933 1 and Korean war emergencies,2 two other states of declared national emergency remain in existence. On March 23, 1970, confronted by a strike of Postal Service employees, President Nixon declared a national emergency.3 The following year, on August

Note 1: See Appendix. p. 594.

2: – Ibid

3 – Ibid, p. 596.

(5)

15, 1971, Nixon proclaimed another emergency,1 under which he imposed stringent import controls in order to meet an international monetary crisis. Because of its general language, however, that proclamation could serve as sufficient authority to use a substantial proportion of all the emergency statutes now on the books.

Over the course of at least the last 40 years, then, Presidents have had available an enormous – seemingly expanding and never-ending – range of emergency powers. Indeed, at their fullest extent and during the height of a crisis, these “prerogative” powers appear to be virtually unlimited, confirming Locke’s perceptions. Because Congress and the public are unaware of the extent of emergency powers, there has never been any notable congressional or public objection made to this state of affairs. Nor have the courts imposed significant limitations.

During the New Deal, the Supreme Court initially struck down much of Roosevelt’s emergency economic legislation (Schecter v. United States, 295 U.S. 495). However, political pressures, a change in personnel, and presidential threats of court-packing, soon altered this course of decisions (NLRB v. Jones & Lauqhlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1). Since 1987, the Court has been extremely reluctant to invalidate any congressional delegation of economic powers to the President. It appears that this will not change in the foreseeable future.

In a significant case directly confronting the issue of wartime emergency powers,Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (343 U.S. 579), the Court refused to allow the President to rely upon implied constitutional powers during a crisis. The action at issue involved presidential seizure of steel plants in a manner apparently directly at odds with congressional policy, Justice Black’s plurality opinion specifically acknowledges that if Congress delegates powers to the President for use during an emergency those powers are absolutely valid within constitutional restraints on Congress’ own power to do so. Concurring opinions appear to agree on this point. It should be noted, therefore, that all statutes in this compilation are precisely these kinds of specific congressional delegations of power.

The 2,000-year-old problem of how a legislative body in a democratic republic may extend extraordinary powers for use by the executive during times of great crisis and dire emergency – but do so in ways assuring both that such necessary powers will be terminated immediately when the emergency has ended and that normal processes will be resumed – has not yet been resolved in this country. Too few are aware of the existence of emergency powers and their extent, and the problem has never been squarely faced.

B – SUMMARY VIEWS OF THE PRESENT STATUS

OF EMERGENCY POWERS STATUTES

A review of the laws passed since the first state of national emergency was declared in 1933, reveals a consistent pattern of lawmaking. It is a pattern showing that the Congress, through its own actions, transferred awesome magnitudes of power to the executive ostensibly to meet the problems of governing effectively in times of great crisis. Since 1933, Congress has passed or recodified over 470 significant statutes delegating to the President powers that had been

Note 1: Ibid, p. 597.

(6)

the prerogative and responsibility of the Congress since the beginning of the Republic. No charge can be sustained that the Executive branch has usurped powers belonging to the Legislative branch; on the contrary, the transfer of power has been in accord with due process of normal legislative procedures.

It is fortunate that at this time that, when the fears and tensions of the cold war are giving way to relative peace and detente is now national policy, Congress can assess the nature, quality, and effect of what has become known as emergency powers legislation. Emergency powers make up a relatively small but important body of statutes – some 470 significant provisions of law out of the total of tens of thousands that have been passed or recodified since 1933. But emergency powers laws are of such significance to civil liberties, to the operation of domestic and foreign commerce, and the general functioning of the U.S. Government, that, in microcosm, they reflect dominant trends in the political, economic, and judicial life in the United States.

A number of conclusions can be drawn from the Special Committee’s study and analysis of emergency powers laws now in effect. Congress has in most important respects, except for the final action of floor debate and the formal passage of bills, permitted the Executive branch to draft and in large measure to “make the laws.” This has occurred despite the constitutional responsibility conferred on Congress by Article I Section 8 of the Constitution which states that it is Congress that “makes all Laws . . .”

Most of the statutes pertaining to emergency powers were passed in times of extreme crisis. Bills drafted in the Executive branch were sent to Congress by the President and, in the case of the most significant laws that ate on the books, were approved with only the most perfunctory committee review and virtually no consideration of their effect on civil liberties or the delicate structure of the U.S. Government of divided powers. For example, the economic measures that were passed in 1933 pursuant to the proclamation of March 5, 1933, by President Roosevelt, asserting that a state of national emergency now existed, were enacted in the most turbulent circumstances. There was a total of only 8 hours of debate in both houses. There were no committee reports; indeed, only one copy of the bill was available an the floor.

This pattern of hasty and inadequate consideration was repeated during World War II when another group of laws with vitally significant and far reaching implications was passed. It was repeated during the Korean war and, again, in most recent memory, during the debate on the Tonkin Gulf Resolution passed on August 6, 1064.

On occasion, legislative history shows that during the limited debates that did take place, a few, but very few, objections were raised by Senators and Congressmen that expressed serious concerns about the lack of provision for congressional oversight. Their speeches raised great doubts about the wisdom of giving such open-ended authority to the President, with no practical procedural means to withdraw that authority once the time of emergency had passed.

For example, one of the very first provisions passed in 1933 was the Emergency Banking Act based upon Section 5(b) of the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917. The provisions gave to President Roosevelt, with the full approval of the Congress, the authority

(7)

to control major aspects of the economy, an authority which had formerly been reserved to the Congress. A portion of that provision, still in force, is quoted here to illustrate the kind of open-ended authority Congress has given to the President during the past 40 years:

(1) During the time of war or during any other period of national emergency declared by the President, the President may, through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise, and under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, by means of instructions, licenses, or otherwise –

(A) investigate, regulate, or prohibit, any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit or payments between, by, through, or to any banking institution, and the importing, exporting, hoarding, melting, or earmarking of gold or silver coin or bullion, currency or securities, and

(B) investigate, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit, any acquisition, holding, withholding, use, transfer, withdrawal, transportation, importation or exportation of, or dealing in, or exercising any right, power, or privilege with respect to, or transactions involving, any property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest.

by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; and any property or interest of any foreign country or national thereof shall vest, when, as, and upon the terms, directed be the President, in such agency or person as may be designated from time to time by the President, and upon such terms and conditions as the President may prescribe such interest or property shall be held, used, administered, liquidated, sold, or otherwise dealt with in the interest of and for the benefit of the United States, and such designated agency or person may perform any and all acts incident to the accomplishment or furtherance of these purposes; and the President shall, in the manner hereinabove provided, require any person to keep a full record of, and to furnish under oath, in the form of reports or otherwise, complete information relative to any act or transaction referred to in this subdivision either before, during, or after the completion thereof, or relative to any interest in foreign property, or relative to any property in which any foreign country or any national thereof has or has had anger interest, or as may be otherwise necessary to enforce the provisions of this subdivision, and in any case in which a report could be required, the President may, in the manner hereinabove provided, receive the production, or if necessary to the national security or defense, the seizure, of any books of account, records, contracts, letters. memoranda. or other papers, in the custody or control of such person; and the President, may, in the manner hereinabove provided, take other and further measures not inconsistent herewith for the enforcement of this subdivision.

(2) Any payment, conveyance, transfer, assignment, or delivery of property or interest therein, made to or for the account of the United States, or as otherwise directed, pursuant to this subdivision or any rule, regulation, instruction,

(8)

or direction issued hereunder shall to the extent thereof be a full acquittance and discharge for all purposes of the obligation of the person making the same; and no person shall be held liable in any court for or in respect to anything done or omitted in good faith in connection with the administration of, or in pursuance of and in reliance on, this subdivision, or any rule, regulation, instruction, or direction issued hereunder.

To cite two further examples:

In the context of the war powers issue and the long debate of the past decade over national commitments, 10 U.S.C. 712 is of importance:

10 U.S.C. 712. Foreign governments: detail to assist.

(a) Upon the application of the country concerned, the President, whenever he considers it in the public interest, may detail members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps to assist in military matters –

(1) any republic in North America, Central America, or South America;

(2) the Republic of Cuba, Haiti, or Santo Domingo and

(3) during a war or a declared national emergency, any other country that he considers it advisable to assist in the interest of national defense.

(b) Subject to the prior approval of the Secretary of the military department concerned, a member detailed under this section may accept any office from the country to which he is detailed. He is entitled to credit for all service while so detailed, as if serving with the armed forces of the United States. Arrangements may be made by the President, with countries to which such members are detailed to perform functions under this section, for reimbursement to the United States or other sharing of the cost of performing such functions.

The Defense Department, in answer to inquiries by the Special Committee concerning this provision, has stated that it has only been used with regard to Latin America, and interprets its applicability as being limited to noncombatant advisers. However, the language of Section 712 is wide open to other interpretations. It could be construed as a way of extending considerable military assistance to any foreign country. Since Congress has delegated this power, arguments could be made against the need for further congressional concurrence in a, time of national emergency.

The repeal of almost all of the Emergency Detention Act of 1950 was a constructive and necessary step, but the following provision remains:

18. U.S.C. 1383. Restrictions in military areas and zones.

Whoever, contrary to the restrictions applicable thereto, enters, remains in, leaves, or commits any act in any military area or military zone prescribed under the authority of an Executive order of the President, by the Secretary of the Army, or by any military commander designated by the Secretary of the Army, shall, if it appears that he knew or

(9)

should have known of the existence and extent of the restrictions or order and that his act was in violation thereof, be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

18 U.S.C. 1383 does not appear on its face to be an emergency power. It was used as the basis for internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II. Although it seems to be cast as a permanent power, the legislative history of the section shows that the statute was intended as a World War II emergency power only, and was not to apply in “normal” peacetime circumstances. Two years ago, the Emergency Detention Act was repealed, yet 18 U.S.C. 1383 has almost the same effect.

Another pertinent question among many, that the Special Committee’s work has revealed, concerns the statutory authority for domestic surveillance by the FBI. According to some experts, the authority for domestic surveillance appears to be based upon an Executive Order issued by President Roosevelt during an emergency period. If it is correct that no firm statutory authority exists, then it is reasonable to suggest that the appropriate committees enact proper statutory authority for the FBI with adequate provision for oversight by Congress.

What these examples suggest and what the magnitude of emergency powers affirm is that most of these laws do not provide for congressional oversight or termination. There are two reasons which can be adduced as to why this is so. First, few, if any, foresaw that the temporary states of emergency declared in 1938, 1939, 1941, 1950, 1970, and 1971 would become what are now regarded collectively as virtually permanent states of emergency (the 1939 and 1941 emergencies were terminated in 1952). Forty years can, in no way, be defined as a temporary emergency.Second, the various administrations who drafted these laws for a variety of reasons were understandably not concerned about providing for congressional review, oversight, or termination of these delegated power’s which gave the President enormous powers and flexibility to use those powers.

The intense anxiety and sense of crisis was contained in the rhetoric of Truman’s 1950 proclamation:

Whereas recent events in Korea and elsewhere constitute a grave threat to the peace of the world and imperil the efforts of this country and those of the United Nations to prevent aggression and armed conflict; and

Whereas world conquest by communist imperialism is the goal of the forces of aggression that have been loosed upon the world; and

Whereas, if the goal of communist imperialism were to be achieved, the people of this country would no longer enjoy the full and rich life they have with God’s help built for themselves and their children; they would no longer enjoy the blessings of the freedom of worshipping as they severally choose, the freedom of reading and listening to what they choose, the right of free speech, including the right to criticize their Government, the right to choose those who will con-

(10)

duct their Government, the right to engage freely in collective bargaining, the right to engage freely in their own business enterprises, and the many other freedoms and rights which are a part of our way of life; and

Whereas, the increasing menace of the forces of communist aggression requires that the national defense of the United States be strengthened as speedily as possible:

Now, therefore, I, Harry S. Truman, President of the United States of America, do proclaim the existence of a national emergency, which requires that the military, naval, air, and civilian defenses of this country be strengthened as speedily as possible to the end that we may be able to repel any and all threats against our national security and to fulfill our responsibilities in the efforts being made through the United Nations and otherwise to bring about lasting peace.

I summon all citizens to make a united effort for the security and well-being of our beloved country and to place its needs foremost in thought and action that the full moral and material strength of the Nation may be readied for the dangers which threaten us.

I summon our farmers, our workers in industry, and our businessmen to make a mighty production effort to meet the defense requirements of the Nation and to this end to eliminate all waste and inefficiency and to subordinate all lesser interests to the common good.

I summon every person and every community to make, with a spirit of neighborliness, whatever sacrifices are necessary for the welfare of the Nation.

I summon all State and local leaders and officialsto cooperate fully with the military and civilian defense agencies of the United States in the national defense program.

I summon all citizens to be loyal to the principles upon which our Nation is founded, to keep faith with our friends and allies, and to be firm in our devotion to the peaceful purposes for which the United Nations was founded.

I am confident that we will meet the dangers that confront us with courage and determination, strong in the faith that we can thereby “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States of America to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington this 16th day of December (10:90 a.m.) in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and fifty, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and seventy-fifth.

HARRY S. TRUMAN
[SEAL]
By the President:

DEAN ACHESON,
Secretary of State

(11)

The heightened sense of crisis of the cold war so evident in Truman’s proclamation has fortunately eased. The legislative shortcomings contained in this body of laws can be corrected on the basis of rational study and inquiry.

In the view of the Special Committee, an emergency does not now exist. Congress, therefore, should act in the near future to terminate officially the states of national emergency now in effect.

At the same time, the Special Committee is of the view that it is essential to provide the means for the Executive to act effectively in an emergency. It is reasonable to have a body of laws in readiness to delegate to the President extraordinary powers to use in times of real national emergency. The portion of the concurring opinion given by Justice Jackson in the Youngstown Steel case with regard to emergency powers provides sound and pertinent guidelines for the maintenance of such a body of emergency laws kept in readiness to be used in times of extreme crisis. Justice Jackson, supporting the majority opinion that the “President’s power must stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself” wrote:

The appeal, however, that we declare the existence of inherent powers ex necessitate to meet an emergency asks us to do what many think would be wise, although it is something the forefathers omitted. They knew what emergencies were, knew the pressures they engender for authoritative action, knew, too, how they afford a ready pretext for usurpation. We may also suspect that they suspected that emergency powers would tend to kindle emergencies. Aside from suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in time of rebellion or invasion, when the public safety may require it, they made no express provision for exercise of extraordinary authority because of a crisis. I do not think we rightfully may so amend their work, and, if we could, I am not convinced it would be wise to do so, although many modern nations have forthrightly recognized that war and economic crises may upset the normal balance between liberty and authority. Their experience with emergency powers may not be irrelevant to the argument here that we should say that the Executive, of his own volition, can invest himself with undefined emergency powers.

Germany, after the First World War, framed the Weimar Constitution, designed to secure her liberties in the Western tradition. However, the President of the Republic, without concurrence of the Reichstag, was empowered temporarily to suspend any or all individual rights if public safety and order were seriously disturbed or endangered. This proved a temptation to every government, whatever its shade of opinion, and in 13 years suspension of rights was invoked on more than 250 occasions. Finally, Hitler persuaded President Von Hindenburg to suspend ail such rights, and they were never restored.

The French Republic provided for a very different kind of emergency government known as the “state of seige.” It differed from the German emergency dictatorship particularly in that emergency powers could not be assumed at will

(12)

by the Executive but could only be granted as a parliamentary measure. And it did not, as in Germany, result in a suspension or abrogation of law but was a legal institution governed by special legal rules and terminable by parliamentary authority.

Great Britain also has fought both World Wars under a sort of temporary dictatorship created by legislation. As Parliament is not bound by written constitutional limitations, it established a crisis government simply by delegation to its Ministers of a larger measure than usual of its own un1imited power, which is exercised under its supervision by Ministers whom it may dismiss, This has been called the “high-water mark in the voluntary surrender of liberty,” but, as Churchill put it, “Parliament stands custodian of these surrendered liberties, and its most sacred duty will be to restore them in their fullness when victory has crowned our exertions and our perseverance.” Thus, parliamentary controls made emergency powers compatible with freedom.

This contemporary foreign experience may be inconclusive as to the wisdom of lodging emergency powers somewhere in a modern government. But it suggests that emergency powers are consistent with free government only when their control is lodged elsewhere than in the Executive who exercises them. That is the safeguard that would be nullified by our adoption of the “inherent pointers” formula. Nothing in my experience convinces me that such risks are warranted by any real necessity, although such powers would, of course, be an executive convenience.

In the practical working of our Government we already have evolved a technique within the framework of the Constitution by which normal executive powers may be considerably expanded to meet an emergency, Congress may and has granted extraordinary authorities which lie dormant in normal times but may be called into play by the Executive in war or upon proclamation of a national emergency. In 1939, upon congressional request, the Attorney General listed ninety-nine such separate statutory grants by Congress of emergency or wartime executive powers. They were invoked from time to time as need appeared. Under this procedure we retain Government by law-special, temporary law, perhaps, but law nonetheless. The public may know the extent and limitations of the powers that can be asserted, and persons affected may be informed from the statute of their rights and duties.

In view of the ease, expedition and safety with which Congress can grant and has granted large emergency powers, certainly ample to embrace this crisis, I am quite unimpressed with the argument that we should affirm possession of them without statute. Such power either has no beginning or it has no end, If it exists, it need submit to no legal restraint. I am not alarmed that it would plunge us straightway into dictatorship, but it is at least a step in that wrong direction.

 24-509 O – 73 – 3

(13)

But I have no illusion that any decision by this Court can keep power in the hands of Congress if it is not wise and timely in meeting its problems. A crisis that challenges the President equally, or perhaps primarily, challenges Congress. If not good law, there was worldly wisdom in the maxim attributed to Napoleon that “The tools belong to the man who can use them.” We may say that power to legislate for emergencies belongs in the hands of Congress, but only Congress itself can prevent power from slipping through its fingers.

The essence of our free Government is “leave to live by no man’s leave, underneath the law” – to be governed by those impersonal forces which we call law. Our Government is fashioned to fulfill this concept so far as humanly possible. The Executive, except for recommendation and veto, has no legislative power. The executive action we have here originates in the individual will of the President and represents an exercise of authority without law. No one, perhaps not even the President, knows the limits of the power he may seek to exert in this instance and the parties affected cannot learn the limit of their rights. We do not know today what powers over labor or property would be claimed to flow from Government possession if we should legalize it, what rights to compensation would be claimed or recognized, or on what contingency it would end. With all its defects, delays and in-conveniences, men have discovered no technique for long preserving free government except that the Executive be under the law, and that the law be made by parliamentary deliberations.

Such institutions may be destined to pass away. But it is the duty of the Court to be last, not first, to give them up.

With these guidelines and against the background of experience of the last 40 years, the task that remains for the Special Committee is to determine – in close cooperation with all the Standing Committees of the Senate and all Departments, Commissions, and Agencies of the Executive branch – which of the laws now in force might be of use in a future emergency. Most important, a legislative formula needs to be devised which will provide a regular and consistent procedure by which any emergency provisions are called into force. It will also be necessary to establish a means by which Congress can exercise effective oversight over such actions as are taken pursuant to a state of national emergency as well as providing a regular and consistent procedure for the termination of such grants of authority.

24-509 O – 73 – 3

(14)

COMPILING THE TEXTS OF EMERGENCY POWER STATUTES

Pursuant to S. Res. 9 of January 6, 1973, the U.S. Senate directed the Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency to study and investigate emergency powers legislation now in force.

From the outset of its work, the Special Committee faced the problem of determining, with reasonable accuracy, the number, nature, and extent of emergency statutes passed by Congress since 1933 which delegate extraordinary powers to the President in time of crisis or impending catastrophe. It was evident, initially, that existing listings of executive emergency powers were either out-of-date or inadequate for the Special Committee’s purposes. It became apparent, too, that the United States Government has been operating under an unrelieved state of emergency of 40 years’ duration. During this period, an enormous body of laws dealing with severe economic crisis and America’s response to three wars had been passed by Congress through an almost unnoticed process of gradual accretion.

In the past, the only way to compile a catalog useful to Congress would have required going through every page of the 86 volumes of the Statutes-at-Large. Fortunately, the U.S. Code (1970 edition and one supplement) was put onto computer tapes by the United States Air Force in the so-called LITE System, which is located at a military facility in the State of Colorado. The Special Committee staff, working in conjunction with the Justice Department, the Library of Congress, and the General Accounting Office, devised several programs for computer searches. These programs were based on a wide spectrum of key words and phrases contained in typical provisions of law , which delegate extraordinary powers. Examples of some trigger words are “national emergency,” “war,” “national defense,” “invasion,” “insurrection,” etc. These programs, designed to produce a computer printout of all provisions of the U.S. Code that pertain to a state of war or national emergency, resulted in several thousand citations. At this point, the Special Committee staff and the staff of the American Law Division, Library of Congress, went through the printouts, separated out all those provisions of the U.S, Code most relevant to war or national emergency, and weeded out those provisions of a trivial or extremely remote nature. Two separate teams worked on the computer printouts and the results were put together in a third basic list of U.S. Code citations.

To determine legislative intent, the U.S. Code citations were then hand checked against the Statutes-at-Large, the Reports of Stand-

(15)

ing Committees of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives and, where applicable, Reports of Senate and House Conferences.

In addition, the laws passed since the publishing of the 1970 Code were checked and relevant citations were added to the master list. The compilation was then checked against existing official catalogs: That of the Department of Defense, “Digest of War and Emergency Legislation Affecting the Department of Defense”; that of the Once of Emergency Planning, “Guide to the Emergency Powers Conferred by Laws in Effect on January 1, 1969”; and, the 1962 House Judiciary Committee synopsis of emergency powers, “Provisions of Federal Law in Effect in Time of National Emergency.”

The task of compiling a catalog of emergency powers statutes, therefore, has been immeasurably assisted by use of computers, but computers could not replace the need for a systematic and very laborious hand search of all of the volumes of the U.S. Code, the Statutes-at-Large, and Senate and House Reports. The following compilation is intended to be used as a working list of the most relevant emergency provisions of the law. The Special Committee cannot be certain that every statute that could or may be called into use during a time of war or national emergency is in the following compilation. However, the Special Committee believes that the most significant provisions are herein cataloged.

The compilation is organized as follows:

1. A summary of all the U.S. Code citations in order of their appearance in the Code, and specific Public Laws with the Congress and the year they were enacted.

2. The texts of U.S. Code citations and Public Laws with explanatory notes and such material from Senate and House Reports which explains Congress’ primary intent concerning these provisions of law.

3. Citation of statutes in accordance to committee jurisdictions.

The appendix contains:

1. Seven tables that list various breakdowns of the usage of the United States Code.

2. The four proclamations of national emergency now in effect.

3. A subject index.

(16)

End of Senate Report 93-549

 10 13 11 flagbar


The UN has a new member the NSA

08/26/2013

 http://www.activistpost.com/2013/08/the-un-has-new-member-nsa.html

By Jon Rappoport

The NSA joined the UN in 2012. But they didn’t go through the usual process. Instead, they hacked in and began bugging UN teleconferences at its New York headquarters.

Der Spiegel, based on another Snowden leak, reports, quoting an NSA document: “The data traffic gives us internal video conferencing of the United Nations (yay!)”

We’re not just talking about General Assembly meetings. NSA had to crack code to get in. Presumably, these were smaller, more private sessions.

Der Speigel also mentions that NSA has been spying on the EU delegation in New York, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Commission), and 80 embassies and consulates around the world.

At this point, I’d normally write something like, “So who hasn’t the NSA been spying on? You, in your home?” But we already know the Agency is collecting information on all of us.

This is how federal agencies operate. Based on technology at their disposal and budget dollars, they’ll extend their “mandate” as far as they possibly can. Breaking the law is as important to them as running a red light is to a cop in pursuit of a bank robber.

NSA is supposed to collect information on behalf of “national security.” This now means “all data on everybody all the time.”

Because their true mission, aligned with that of the federal government, is control.

If the FDA had enough funding, they would track every item of food sold in America from farm to store to customer to digestion to elimination, just because they could. ATF would list and track every weapon from the North Pole to Tierra del Fuego. The Dept. of the Interior would label and analyze every inch of soil in America.
The technicians in these agencies would be thrilled to carry out such tasks. Give them an objective, tell them you want a system, and they’ll go to it like bloodhounds.

When government officials use the word “freedom,” they’re really saying, “You know, that old fairy tale people used to amuse themselves with.” We have our own clash of civilizations right here at home. It’s between, on the one side, government and its enabling partners, and on the other side, those of us who still know freedom actually means something. That clash isn’t going away.

That’s why you’ll find the following statement in a DOD training manual titled, Extremism, just exposed by Judicial Watch:

In US history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.

Well, I guess that settles that. The colonists were just a bunch of extremist crazies. No connection to us now. A fringe group of haters. For some reason, they didn’t like the British.

One of the crazy colonists penned this quote. You can understand why the federal government of today prefers to think of him and his ilk as extremists:

When the representative body have lost the confidence of their constituents, when they have notoriously made sale of their most valuable rights, when they have assumed to themselves powers which the people never put into their hands, then indeed their continuing in office becomes dangerous to the state, and calls for an exercise of the power of dissolution. (Thomas Jefferson, 1774)

What would a less extremist mind produce? Something like this: “It is the sworn duty of the government to protect its citizens. In this regard, smashing the walls of privacy in every facet of life is essential. A protected citizen is a known citizen. If he errs, he can be corrected, through persuasion, peer pressure, threat, harassment, arrest and prosecution. A citizen who takes a dim view of government power is a potential terrorist. He is dangerous to the collective. He must be stopped.”

Yes, that’s a much more balanced and modern view. A person writing that statement would be given a pass by the government.

Actually, on a scale of venality, the NSA snooping on the UN ranks fairly low. I just wish the NSA would publish every word of what they’ve picked up. Then we would see what an infernal organization is headquartered in New York. Spying on one organic farmer in California is far worse than spying on the whole UN.

Finally, it shouldn’t escape your attention that the NSA is an agency formed under the Pentagon. That means the military is spying on everybody in America. The fact that the Pentagon is a section of the Dept. of Defense, which itself is under the control of White House merely indicates the President is doing nothing to stop the military.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Trust me! If you have the financial muscle to get the hell out of America, don’t let the door hit you in the butt. This country is toast, mostly due to the vast number of donkey’s who don’t read anything and therefore don’t have a clue what’s going on in the government. If ignorance really is bliss, there is a hell of a lot of happy donkeys in America. We need a hundred million informed and pissed off patriot’s.

10 13 11 flagbar


The Confidential Memo at the Heart of the Global Financial Crisis

08/24/2013

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2013/08/23/the-confidential-memo-at-the-heart-of-the-global-financial-crisis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

 By TRUTHER

When a little birdie dropped the End Game memo through my window, its content was so explosive, so sick and plain evil, I just couldn’t believe it.

The Memo confirmed every conspiracy freak’s fantasy: that in the late 1990s, the top US Treasury officials secretly conspired with a small cabal of banker big-shots to rip apart financial regulation across the planet. When you see 26.3 percent unemployment in Spain, desperation and hunger in Greece, riots in Indonesia and Detroit in bankruptcy, go back to this End Game memo, the genesis of the blood and tears.

The Treasury official playing the bankers’ secret End Game was Larry Summers. Today, Summers is Barack Obama’s leading choice for Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, the world’s central bank. If the confidential memo is authentic, then Summers shouldn’t be serving on the Fed, he should be serving hard time in some dungeon reserved for the criminally insane of the finance world.

The memo is authentic.

I had to fly to Geneva to get confirmation and wangle a meeting with the Secretary General of the World Trade OrganisationPascal Lamy. Lamy, the Generalissimo of Globalisation, told me,

“The WTO was not created as some dark cabal of multinationals secretly cooking plots against the people… We don’t have cigar-smoking, rich, crazy bankers negotiating.”

Then I showed him the memo.

It begins with Larry Summers’ flunky, Timothy Geithner, reminding his boss to call the Bank bigshots to order their lobbyist armies to march:

“As we enter the end-game of the WTO financial services negotiations, I believe it would be a good idea for you to touch base with the CEOs…”

To avoid Summers having to call his office to get the phone numbers (which, under US law, would have to appear on public logs), Geithner listed the private lines of what were then the five most powerful CEOs on the planet. And here they are:

Goldman SachsJohn Corzine (212)902-8281

Merrill Lynch: David Kamanski (212)449-6868

Bank of America: David Coulter (415)622-2255

Citibank: John Reed (212)559-2732

Chase Manhattan: Walter Shipley (212)270-1380

Lamy was right: They don’t smoke cigars. Go ahead and dial them. I did, and sure enough, got a cheery personal hello from Reed – cheery until I revealed I wasn’t Larry Summers. (Note: The other numbers were swiftly disconnected. And Corzine can’t be reached while he faces criminal charges.)

It’s not the little cabal of confabs held by Summers and the banksters that’s so troubling. The horror is in the purpose of the “end game” itself.

Let me explain:

The year was 1997. US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin was pushing hard to de-regulate banks. That required, first, repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act to dismantle the barrier between commercial banks and investment banks. It was like replacing bank vaults with roulette wheels.

Second, the banks wanted the right to play a new high-risk game: “derivatives trading”. JP Morgan alone would soon carry $88 trillion of these pseudo-securities on its books as “assets”.

Deputy Treasury Secretary Summers (soon to replace Rubin as Secretary) body-blocked any attempt to control derivatives.

But what was the use of turning US banks into derivatives casinos if money would flee to nations with safer banking laws?

The answer conceived by the Big Bank Five: eliminate controls on banks in every nation on the planet — in one single move. It was as brilliant as it was insanely dangerous.

How could they pull off this mad caper? The bankers’ and Summers’ game was to use the Financial Services Agreement (or FSA), an abstruse and benign addendum to the international trade agreements policed by the World Trade Organisation.

Until the bankers began their play, the WTO agreements dealt simply with trade in goods – that is, my cars for your bananas. The new rules devised by Summers and the banks would force all nations to accept trade in “bads” – toxic assets like financial derivatives.

Until the bankers’ re-draft of the FSA, each nation controlled and chartered the banks within their own borders. The new rules of the game would force every nation to open their markets to Citibank, JP Morgan and their derivatives “products”.

And all 156 nations in the WTO would have to smash down their own Glass-Steagall divisions between commercial savings banks and the investment banks that gamble with derivatives.

The job of turning the FSA into the bankers’ battering ram was given to Geithner, who was named Ambassador to the World Trade Organisation.

Bankers Go Bananas

Why in the world would any nation agree to let its banking system be boarded and seized by financial pirates like JP Morgan?

The answer, in the case of Ecuador, was bananas. Ecuador was truly a banana republic. The yellow fruit was that nation’s life-and-death source of hard currency. If it refused to sign the new FSA, Ecuador could feed its bananas to the monkeys and go back into bankruptcy. Ecuador signed.

And so on – with every single nation bullied into signing.

Every nation but one, I should say. Brazil’s new President, Inacio Lula da Silva, refused. In retaliation, Brazil was threatened with a virtual embargo of its products by the European Union’s Trade Commissioner, one Peter Mandelson, according to another confidential memo I got my hands on. But Lula’s refusenikstance paid off for Brazil which, alone among Western nations, survived and thrived during the 2007-9 bank crisis.

China signed – but got its pound of flesh in return. It opened its banking sector a crack in return for access and control of the US auto parts and other markets. (Swiftly, two million US jobs shifted to China.)

The new FSA pulled the lid off the Pandora’s box of worldwide derivatives trade. Among the notorious transactions legalized: Goldman Sachs (where Treasury Secretary Rubin had been co-chairman) worked a secret euro-derivatives swap with Greece which, ultimately, destroyed that nation. Ecuador, its own banking sector de-regulated and demolished, exploded into riots. Argentina had to sell off its oil companies (to the Spanish) and water systems (to Enron) while its teachers hunted for food in garbage cans. Then, Bankers Gone Wild in the Eurozone dove head-first into derivatives pools without knowing how to swim – and the continent is now being sold off in tiny, cheap pieces to Germany.

Of course, it was not just threats that sold the FSA, but temptation as well. After all, every evil starts with one bite of an apple offered by a snake. The apple: the gleaming piles of lucre hidden in the FSA for local elites. The snake was named Larry.

Does all this evil and pain flow from a single memo? Of course not: the evil was The Game itself, as played by the banker clique. The memo only revealed their game-plan for checkmate.

And the memo reveals a lot about Summers and Obama.

While billions of sorry souls are still hurting from worldwide banker-made disaster, Rubin and Summers didn’t do too badly. Rubin’s deregulation of banks had permitted the creation of a financial monstrosity called “Citigroup”. Within weeks of leaving office, Rubin was named director, then Chairman of Citigroup – which went bankrupt while managing to pay Rubin a total of $126 million.

Then Rubin took on another post: as key campaign benefactor to a young State Senator, Barack Obama. Only days after his election as President, Obama, at Rubin’s insistence, gave Summers the odd post of US “Economics Tsar” and made Geithner his Tsarina (that is, Secretary of Treasury). In 2010, Summers gave up his royalist robes to return to “consulting” for Citibank and other creatures of bank deregulation whose payments have raised Summers’ net worth by $31 million since the “end-game” memo.

That Obama would, at Robert Rubin’s demand, now choose Summers to run the Federal Reserve Board means that, unfortunately, we are far from the end of the game.

Special thanks to expert Mary Bottari of Bankster USA www.BanksterUSA.org without whom our investigation could not have begun.

The film of my meeting with WTO chief Lamy was originally created for Ring of Fire, hosted by Mike Papantonio and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Further discussion of the documents I laid before Lamy can be found in “The Generalissimo of Globalization,” Chapter 12 of Vultures’ Picnic by Greg Palast (Constable Robinson 2012).

http://www.amazon.com/Vultures-Picnic-Petroleum-High-Finance-Carnivores/dp/0452298644/ref=tmm_pap_title_0/?tag=wwwgregpala03-20

10 13 11 flagbar


Obama Has Hired the Fox to Watch the Hen House and NSA Caught Red Handed

08/19/2013

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/08/obama-has-hired-fox-to-watch-hen-house.html

 By Dave Hodges

In the aftermath of the Snowden revelations and furthered by the admission that the NSA has broken the law thousands of times in order to illegally spy on the American people, Obama has decided to appoint a special “commission” to fairly and accurately investigate the latest revelations of this rogue, anti-American agency.
The Whitewash Commissions

You remember those commissions don’t you? Do you remember the Warren Commission and the bang up job they did? The Warren Commission, with its own deception and incompetence created a cottage industry of doubters because their lies were so unbelievable. Do you remember who served on the Warren Commission? How about Allen Dulles, the CIA director that JFK fired. How about Gerald Ford, who would be handsomely rewarded for his treason while serving on the Warren Commission by handing him the presidency when Nixon was deposed. And we know Ford and JFK were enemies in the Senate. How about Congressman Hale Boggs? In 1972, Boggs openly questioned the Commission’s conclusion and handling of evidence. He, along with his main supporter Congressman Nick Begich, disappeared in a plane over Alaska.

You remember the 9/11 Commission don’t you? Nineteen terrorists armed only with box cutters paralyzed the country while destroying 3 WTC buildings and the Pentagon, with the aid of the complete suspension of physics on that day. You remember the 9/11 Commission who totally ignored the huge insurance payout of $7 billion dollars to Larry Silverstein paid on a policy on the WTC buildings. The policy was only taken out a short time before the incident. How about the fact that Goldman Sachs shorted airline stocks only a week before the event? None of these events were ever looked at by the “Commission.” I could go on and on, but you should get the idea.

Meet the New Boss, Same As the Old Boss

And now we have a new Commission. President Obama proclaimed this week that “By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I am directing you to establish a Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies” (akaThe Review Group). Wait a minute, didn’t Obama recently state that the NSA spy program was not breaking any laws. We should not be surprised, Investment Watch just detailed 252 major lies that Obama has told since he took office. That is what psychopaths do, they lie, repeatedly.

According to Obama, The Review Group will determine whether “the United States employs its technical collection capabilities in a manner that optimally protects our national security and advances our foreign policy while appropriately accounting for other policy considerations, such as the risk of unauthorized disclosure and our need to maintain the public trust. Within 60 days of its establishment, the Review Group will brief their interim findings to me through the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and the Review Group will provide a final report and recommendations to me through the DNI no later than December 15, 2013.”

The DNI? Really, the DNI is going to be in charge? The DNI is headed by James R. Clapper, one of the biggest liars in Washington D.C.

Who is Obama kidding? Clapper lied to Congress about spying when he said that Washington has no domestic spying program. He committed blatant perjury in his testimony to Congress and he has not been held accountable. When is Clapper going to do the “perp walk.” What would happen to you and I if we had lied to Congress? I am almost forgot that Clapper issued an apology so I guess we can trust him to not never lie or break the law again. With Clapper in charge of the Commission appointments, we can expect another Warren Commission and 9/11 Commission rolled into one.

Conclusion

In other words, this President authorizes spying on Americans and now he is going to seek to justify his actions.

Has anyone actually considered why the NSA and the other alphabet soup agencies are spying on us? I go back to my days as a college basketball coach. I used to travel long distances in order to scout my future opponents and/or watch a lot of game film on opposing teams as well. Why would I do this? I wanted to come to know my enemy as well as I knew myself because I was preparing to defeat my enemy. Why would NSA spying be any different than the scouting a college basketball coach performs. What is the end game? Well, when you combined unlimited spying on American citizens, with the DHS purchase of 2 billion rounds of ammunition. It seems that the end game intent is very clear and the rank and file of the conservative element in this country is in a lot of trouble.

I grew up in an America which was a republic interspersed with some corruption. Today’s America is a corporate criminal enterprise where there are no rules for the elite, and the republic concepts underlying our laws are on life support.

Dave is an award winning psychology, statistics and research professor, a college basketball coach, a mental health counselor, a political activist and writer who has published dozens of editorials and articles in several publications such as Freedoms PhoenixNews With Views andThe Arizona Republic.

NSA Caught Red-Handed

 http://www.activistpost.com/2013/08/nsa-caught-red-handed.html

 By Stephen Lendman

It’s a longstanding rogue agency. It always operated extra-judicially. It’s worse than ever now. It’s a power unto itself.

Obama claims “(w)e don’t have a domestic spying program. What we do have are some mechanisms where we can track a phone number or an email address that we know is connected to some sort of terrorist threat.”

False! Obama knows it. He lied. He always lies. He’s a serial liar. NSA has a longstanding domestic spying program.

On August 15, the Washington Post headlined “NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, audit finds.”

Most infractions involved “unauthorized surveillance of Americans or foreign intelligence targets in the United States.”

Doing so is restricted “by statute and executive order.” Violations range from “significant ones to typographical errors that resulted in unintended interception of US e-mails and telephone calls.”

Agency personnel are told to substitute generic language for specific details. They do in Justice Department and Director of National Intelligence reports.

They delay sending them. The FISA court didn’t learn about an unconstitutional new collection method until months after it began.
Obama officials repeatedly stonewall. Secrecy substitutes for transparency.

After promising to explain NSA operations in “as transparent a way as we possibly can,” Deputy Attorney General James Cole dismissively told Congress:

“Every now and then, there may be a mistake.” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper lied. He committed perjury. He got away with it. He remains unaccountable.

Obama appointed him to investigate NSA spying. He’ll head a so-called independent commission. Putting him in charge assures cover-up, denial and whitewash. It assures business as usual.

He told Congress NSA has no domestic spying program. When it was too late to matter, he disingenuously apologized for a “clearly erroneous” statement.

NSA audit information WaPo obtained “counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications.”

Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure.

The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders.

There is no reliable way to calculate from the number of recorded compliance issues how many Americans have had their communications improperly collected, stored or distributed by the NSA.

Causes and severity vary widely. Sweeping surveillance assures many lawless practices. Serious ones happen often.

Audit data included only incidents at NSA’s Fort Meade headquarters and other Washington area facilities.

Three government officials spoke on condition of anonymity. They said infractions would be much higher if other “NSA operating units and regional collection centers” were included.

One of the most serious violations involves “divert(ing) large volumes of international data passing through fiber-optic cables in the United States into a repository where the material could be stored temporarily for processing and selection.”

NSA calls it “multiple communications transactions.” Domestic and foreign ones are commingled.

NSA calls its mission “cryptology that encompasses both Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and Information Assurance (IA) products and services, and enables Computer Network Operations (CNO) in order to gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances.”

Signals Intelligence Management Directive 421 says “raw SIGINT data…includes, but is not limited to, unevaluated and/or un-minimized transcripts, gists, facsimiles, telex, voice, and some forms of computer-generated data, such as call event records and other Digital Network Intelligence (DNI) metadata as well as DNI message text.”

WaPo said database query incidents into “raw SIGINT data… include, but (are) not limited to, unevaluated and/or un-minimized transcripts, gists, facsimiles, telex, voice, and some forms of computer-generated data, such as call event records and other Digital Network Intelligence (DNI) metadata as well as DNI message text.”

NSA claims collecting information on Americans while targeting foreigners suspected of terrorism “does not constitute a violation.”

It “does not have to be reported” for inclusion in quarterly congressional reports, it said. Once obtained, communications of Americans are freely searched.

A second WaPo article headlined “Court: Ability to police US spying program limited,” saying:

The FISA court’s chief judge said the body lacks tools to “independently verify how often the government’s surveillance breaks the court’s rules that aim to protect Americans’ privacy.”

According to chief FISA court Judge Reggie B. Walton:

The FISC is forced to rely upon the accuracy of the information that is provided to the Court.

The FISC does not have the capacity to investigate issues of noncompliance, and in that respect the FISC is in the same position as any other court when it comes to enforcing (government) compliance with its orders.

WaPo said the FISA court can demand and obtain more information about cases. It’s unclear how often it happens. The court’s largely rubber stamp. It’s complicit with lawless spying.

On August 15, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) headlined “NSA Spying: The Three Pillars of Government Trust,” saying:

US officials lied. They claim rigorous executive, congressional and judiciary oversight of NSA activities. Doing so they say assures no lawless privacy invasions.

“Today, the Washington Post confirmed that two of those oversight pillars – the Executive branch and the court overseeing the spying, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA court) – don’t really exist,” said EFF.

The third pillar came down slowly over the last few weeks, with Congressional revelations about the limitations on its oversight, including what Representative Sensennbrenner called ‘rope a dope’ classified briefings.

Trust in government oversight’s no longer warranted. It never was. For sure it’s not now.

Snowden explained in stark detail. So did whistleblowers Russell Tice, Mark Klein and others. Unconstitutional data-mining is longstanding practice. All three branches of government are involved.

They’re complicit in sweeping lawless spying. Millions of Americans are affected. According to EFF:

The pattern is now clear and it’s getting old. With each new revelation the government comes out with a new story for why things are really just fine, only to have that assertion demolished by the next revelation.

It’s time for those in government who want to rebuild the trust of the American people and others all over the world to come clean and take some actual steps to rein in the NSA.

And if they don’t, the American people and the public, adversarial courts, must force change upon it.

The three pillars of American trust have fallen. It’s time to get a full reckoning and build a new house from the wreckage, but it has to start with some honesty.

Join EFF in calling for a full investigation by emailing Congress today.

For far too long, secret law and a secret surveillance state have been a dark shadow on Americans’ freedom. It’s time to shine a light on NSA’s spying.

It’s time to fully expose its dark side. It’s time to stop America heading for full-blown tyranny. It’s time to do it now.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book is titled How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War.

10 13 11 flagbar