Senate Bill 1867

December 5, 2011

Are YOU an "Enemy Combatant" or a "Terrorist"?

  With so much information (and "disinformation") floating around the internet regarding the passage of Senate Bill 1867 (the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, for fiscal year 2012), I felt it necessary to post this article.  The NDAA regularly comes before Congress for changes and additions, but Senate Bill 1867 proves to be the most powerful one yet in trampling the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Let me ask you a question. Can the president use the military to arrest anyone he wants, keep that person away from a judge and jury, and lock him up for as long as he wants? According to Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, "In the Senate's dark and terrifying vision of the Constitution, he can."  Two weeks ago, during Thanksgiving week, while the typical American was comatose in front of the television, watching countless hours of football and recuperating from the gluttony that accompanies this holiday, Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) met in secret and drafted an amendment to the NDAA bill. This amendment was then passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing.

What was in this amendment?

In a nutshell, this amendment permits the President to use the U.S. military against American citizens in the USA. He would have the legal (not lawful) authority to arrest, detain, imprison, torture (or conduct "enhanced interrogation" if you prefer the government's semantic work-around), and even kill ANYONE he wishes (including a U.S. citizen) without even charging him with a crime! And that person, under this disturbing bill, would have no recourse to a judge to require the President to either set him free or file charges against him. This would all be accomplished via military tribunal (rather than civilian court). Military tribunals are the complete antithesis of the civilian justice system, and putting American citizens through such a system would signal the death of everything the American justice system was built upon. As far as I have seen, there are no detailed requirements set forth in the bill which have to be met before the military can indefinitely detain, and torture Americans and people around the world and here in the "homeland."  For those of you American sheeple who are still wondering what "homeland" means, it's a phrase borrowed from Nazi Germany (which is the source of much of this draconian legislation). If this bill is implemented, it is truly an end of our Republic. A recent ACLU study of the bill called it "the most unconstitutional legislation in modern history." This bill virtually ends "Posse Comitatus" (which bars the military from domestic operations).

93 Treasonous Senators

On December 2, 2011, the U.S. Senate voted to pass Senate Bill 1867 by a vote of 93-7. In essence, the Constitution has been betrayed and undermined by its most solemnly sworn trustees! The only seven Senators who even deserve a chance of re-election are: Tom Coburn (R-OK); Tom Harkin (D-IA); Mike Lee (R-UT); Merkley (D-OR); Rand Paul (R-KY); Bernard Sanders (I-VT); Ron Wyden (D-OR).  McCain is a traitor. Levin is a traitor. The other 91 Senators who voted for this egregious bill are also traitors. At the very least they should be impeached. I personally believe they should be tried for treason, as these pathetic human beings are not only defying their oath of office in waging war on the U.S. Constitution, but they are also fighting to destroy the most critical rights we have in this country and in doing so are desecrating everything that our forefathers fought (and died) for. Senator Rand Paul argued against this atrocious bill stating, "Should we err today and remove some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism, well then the terrorists have won. [D]etaining American citizens without a court trial is not American." This bill is one of the final steps necessary in striking down any remaining Constitutional protections or rights, all under the phony "war on terror" hoax, being perpetrated by our own government against its own citizens. This is not a right or left, Democrat or Republican plan......they are all in it together.   According to Mike Adams, "I don't know if you're all getting this through your heads yet, but Senate Bill 1867 _the National Defense Authorization Act_ would openly "legalize" the U.S. government's detainment and murder of OWS [Occupy Wall Street] protesters and the assassination of talk show hosts, bloggers, journalists and anyone who holds a so-called "anti-government" point of view. This is the open and blatant declaration of war against any who do not going along with TSA thugs reaching down your pants, the Goldman Sachs economic takeover of nations, the secret arrest and torture of American citizens, and other acts of outright tyranny waged by an out-of-control government. Those who have been burying their heads in the sand over the coming police state need to wake up and face the music. That U.S. Senators would knowingly and willfully attempt to pass a bill that legalizes the indefinite detainment, torture and killing of American citizens with no due process whatsoever _ and on American soil! — is nothing less than a traitorous betrayal of the once-free American people. These are, our founding fathers would have said, acts of war against the People. They reveal the insidious plan to put in place a legal framework to end the Bill of Rights, murder protesters, and overrun America with total police state brutality." According to Charles Edward Lincoln III, who is running for the U.S. Senate in California, "Senate Bill 1867 represents nothing but Stalinist Communist Dictatorship at its worst.  This is Oriental Despotism installed and housed in America under the Flag of Our Fathers.  Did we fight the Kaiser, Hitler, and the Cold War only to institute such things as this at home?  Did we take in thousands of refugees from Vietnam after 1974-75 because we offered them a worse life than they would have had along the Mekong Delta?  I think not.  I defy and deny the right of any Senator who voted for this bill to call himself an American, much less a Patriot. All 93 Senators who voted for S.B. 1867 should be removed from office . . . and sent to Singapore to be prosecuted and punished as major Drug using narcotics-offenders for whatever kind of crack they're smoking that makes them think this is all right, because it is not.   . . .   What happened that even Mark Udall of Colorado voted for the bill after his amendments failed?  To HELL with Florida's Marco Rubio, Louisiana's David Vitter, Texas' John Cornyn, and every other cowardly craven Senator who voted in favor of this bill, including every other Senator who ever pretended to be in favor of freedom or the Constitution.   These are the times that try men's souls, and the trial of 93 Senators for Treason is way overdue to begin right now.  If I am elected to the United States Senate from California I swear on the graves of my grandparents, my father's soul and my mother's heart that I will fight to erase the past twenty years of freedom-suppressing legislation from the United States Statutes at Large and U.S. Code until no trace of them is left, either in those statutes or in the Code of Federal Regulations nor in any guidelines to law-enforcement officials having any force or effect on the construction or interpretation of the law.  To HELL with Lindsey Graham, Joe Lieberman, John McCain and Carl Levin and all the lot of other fakes and phonies.  To HELL with both of California's Com(munist)-Symp(athizing) Senators who would turn America into one vast prison camp in the name of ‘Security'."  Wow! I tell you what folks, if I lived in California, I would make sure that I voted for Charles Edward Lincoln III.

What is a "Writ of Habeas Corpus"?

A writ of habeas corpus is a judicially enforceable order issued by a court of law to a prison official ordering that a prisoner be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that prisoner had been lawfully imprisoned and, if not, whether he or she should be released from custody. The actual right to the writ of habeas corpus is not stated anywhere in the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights. The authors of these documents apparently believed that habeas corpus was such a fundamental liberty that it needed no further guarantee in writing. The only mention of the writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. Constitution relates to when it can be taken away from judges. In Article I, Section 9, the U.S. Constitution states: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in causes of rebellion or invasion of the public safety may require it." This is commonly known as the "Suspension Clause."  It's important to understand that the "Suspension Clause" only allows detention (not trial by military tribunal) and it also does not make it "legal" for the government to torture people, or summarily execute them. The Bill of Rights commands which prevent these actions are not suspended. The "Suspension Clause" was never activated through the terms of the first 15 presidents. Then along came Abraham Lincoln. As the Civil War started, in the very beginning of Lincoln's presidential term, a group of "Peace Democrats" proposed a peaceful resolution to the developing Civil War by offering a truce with the South, and forming a constitutional convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to protect States' rights. The proposal was ignored by the Unionists of the North and not taken seriously by the South. However, the Peace Democrats, also called "copperheads" by their enemies, publicly criticized Lincoln's belief that violating the U.S. Constitution was required to save it as a whole.  In 1862, when the "copperheads" began criticizing Lincoln's violation of the U.S. Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus (without consulting Congress) and had many copperheads arrested under military authority because he felt that the state courts in the north would not convict war protesters. Lincoln boldly proclaimed that all persons who engaged in "disloyal" practices would come under Martial Law. According to Oathkeepers' founder, Stewart Rhodes, "During the Civil War, more than 13,535 Northern civilians were arrested by the military and at least 4,271 of these were tried before military tribunals, with some of them being executed. Typical charges were vague accusations of violating the laws and customs of war. In one such case, a man was found guilty of violations of the laws of war for letting rebels lurk in his neighborhood without reporting them. Others were accused of harboring rebels or engaging in guerilla warfare. This treatment of northern civilians as the enemy is what the Milligan Court ruled unconstitutional after the war." See Ex Parte Milligan (1866).  It is vital that we see clearly that the Milligan Court rejected the argument that a U.S. citizen could ever be an "enemy." The Court affirmed the use of military jurisdiction over two categories of persons: 1) those in the U.S. military (and in the militia when called into service) and 2) the enemy. In summarizing this decision, Stewart Rhodes states, "The Court pointed out that Mr. Milligan was not in the military (the Union Army) and was not a resident of one of the rebellious states. This is really the same as saying he was not a citizen or resident of a foreign nation with which we were at war. It did not matter to the Milligan Court what Milligan had done, or what laws of war he might have violated. What counted was who he was. If he was a northern civilian, he could not be tried by tribunal for any actions nor held as a POW or "unlawful combatant" because he just was not in one of the two categories of people subject to the military. He was a northern citizen who was making war on his nation and aiding the enemy. The proper remedy for such is a trial for treason, or at least for violation of a statute, before a jury in an Article III court, not a military trial. What the Milligan Court upheld is the Constitution's separation of civilian and military jurisdiction. The Founders, and the people who ratified the Constitution, were very concerned about overreaching military power. In fact, prior to the Revolution, the colonists had even been upset about British soldiers being tried by tribunals, rather than civilian juries, for offenses committed off duty. The colonists considered such tribunals a violation of the rights of Englishmen. The Founders knew the sad English history of the abuse of special military and executive courts, such as the infamous Star Chamber, during England's many upheavals and coups and endeavored to prevent their recurrence." After the Civil War, the Supreme Court had effectively put the "martial law genie" back into the bottle with the Milligan decision.  However, during World War II, FDR released the "genie" when he sent over 110,000 Japanese Americans to concentration camps in the USA!  Over 70,000 of these Japanese people were also American citizens! Citing the "doctrine of military necessity," on February 19, 1942, FDR signed Executive Order 9066, giving the secretary of war the power to designate military areas from which "any or all persons may be excluded" and authorized military commanders to initiate orders they deemed advisable to enforce such action. Basically, FDR asserted went against the Milligan decision and stated that "who" they were (i.e. American citizens) did NOT matter. Then along came Bush... President George W. Bush was perhaps the most anti-American President in our history. From the illegal and unconstitutional wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the insidious PATRIOT Act, to the Security Enhancement Act of 2003, to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, to the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007, Bush committed dozens of war crimes (he has been convicted of such in other countries) and steadily moved our country closer and closer to martial law under a dictator (himself). He obliterated the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. But that's not surprising, in light of Bush's 2005 outburst that the Constitution is "just a g*ddamned piece of paper!" Now why, you might be asking, would anyone want to give the president of the United States the arbitrary authority to strip any US citizen of their citizenship with no evidence other than his/her belief that one of us is a terrorist, or supports terrorism, without the evidence supporting that contention, or being officially charged with a crime? According to Marti Oakley, "Hmmm.  Where to start on this one. Let's go back to the redefining of prisoners of war (POW's) as   "enemy combatants". This change in terminology allowed the Bush regime, and now Obama, to by-pass the Geneva conventions on treatment of prisoners, including what has become our government's proclivity for torture and avoided much of the international rules of war.   It didn't seem like much at the time, but we know now that it was to redefine the individuals targeted; if we don't call them prisoners of war we don't have to abide by the rules.  Simple. Next came Homeland Security's determination that US citizens who oppose government policy, mention the Constitution, support third party candidates like Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin, were to viewed as possible domestic terrorists along with social advocates, religious advocates and anyone who attended a rally or protest among many other things.  This was followed by the discovery of  Homeland Security documents describing who was to be viewed as a clear and present danger to the federal government (not the country) citing the use of REX84 black ops program along with Presidential Directive 51, that no one has been allowed to see, to conduct "Knock & Talk , Sneak & Peek, checkpoints; exigent search and seizure; meaning far more than what would be determined reasonable. Next came the launching of TSA which had been planned long before 9/11.  The unlawful detaining of legal US citizens with the accompanying exigent search and molestation continues to this day for no other reason than they are traveling.  HSD has compiled no-fly lists, suspect lists, black lists, suspected domestic terrorists list and a host of other lists  most of will never know we are on for reasons we will never actually know.   Originally called Total Information Awareness (TIA), the program was shut down in 2003.  Like all things the government does, TIA never went anywhere but simply got parceled out to other agencies making it harder to track while the core program was simply renamed TSA. Most recently, Obama has approved a new program which allows him to authorize the targeted killing of people in foreign countries that the administration decides is a threat (to them) and includes targeting of  US citizens right here at home and abroad.  This program, which is nothing more than sanctified murder, is a violation of international laws which prohibit the killing of individuals outside of armed combat zones.  The program will allow the CIA or the military the unchecked authority to murder at will, US citizens and others, around the globe without any evidence of crime, threat or violent activity towards the United States, other than they said so.  The intent through all of these assaults on the Constitution and our protected rights has been to find the means to redefine any one of us as a non-military enemy combatant to facilitate the police state.  Once redefined, once the definitive description of who and what we are has been altered to suit the government agenda, it is open season on any one of us." Our founders made it clear that we should take up arms for the following government offenses:
  1. Denial of a jury trial for US citizens
  2. Attempt to make the military superior to civil power
  3. Take across the sea to trial
This is EXACTLY what is happening today, and Senate Bill 1867 is doing far worse than what our founders fought against!! One of the causes of the American Revolution was the denial of the right to jury trial, the use of admiralty courts (military tribunals) instead, and the application of the "laws of war" to the colonists. After that experience, and being well aware of the infamous Star Chamber in English history, the Founders ensured that the international laws of war would apply only to foreign enemies, not to the American people.

What was the Infamous "Star Chamber"?

England's "Star Chamber" (you've probably seen the 1983 Michael Douglas movie with the same name) was an English court of law which was located at the royal Palace of Westminster. The Star Chamber witnessed the trials of royalty and nobility between 1487 and 1641. The primary function of the Star Chamber was to hear cases involving political libel, heresy and treason. Star Chamber sessions were secret (closed to the public) and became greatly feared. The Star Chamber court sessions were clandestine meetings which had no jury, there was no right of appeal, and there were no witnesses. The powerful Court of the Star Chamber evolved into a political weapon to use against any opponents of the policies of the monarch. Does this sound familiar? Who was it that said, "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists"? In other words, if you dissent with the government, you may be considered to be a terrorist... The most common Star Chamber crimes included:
  • High Treason
  • Blasphemy
  • Sedition
  • Spying
  • Rebellion
  • Murder
The punishment for most of the above crimes was death. There were various forms of execution. These terrible punishments included execution by beheading and burning. The terrible punishment for high treason was to be hung, drawn, and quartered.

A New Definition of "Terrorist" and "Enemy Combatant"

The UN-Patriotic PATRIOT Act redefined "terrorism" in Section 802. The "new" definition is basically ANY action that endangers human life that is a violation of federal law. In other words, virtually ANY crime could qualify you as a "terrorist."  In Section 501 (Expatriation of Terrorists), the definition of "enemy combatant" is expanded to ALL American citizens who "may" have violated any provision of Section 802. Under Section 501, a U.S. citizen engaging in lawful activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen again. The Justice Department states that they can do this because the person "had inferred from conduct" that they were not a U.S. citizen. The PATRIOT Act defines domestic terrorism so broadly that it could potentially apply to an individual exercising his or her freedom of speech, expression, and assembly through acts of civil disobedience. On November 22, 2011, Republican Presidential candidates Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich debated the merits of extending the Patriot Act to "secure the homeland." Ron Paul was accurate when he stated, "The Patriot Act is unpatriotic because it undermines our liberty...Don't be willing to sacrifice liberty for security. Today it seems too easy that our government and our Congresses are so willing to give up our liberty. I have a personal belief that you never have to give up liberty for security. You can still provide security without sacrificing our Bill of Rights...This is like saying we need a policeman in every house, a camera in every house...You can prevent crimes by becoming a police state. If you advocate the police state, yes, you can have safety and security, and you might prevent a crime, but the crime then will be against the American people and against our freedoms and we will throw out so much of what our revolution was fought for, so don't do it so carelessly. Gingrich, the former House speaker, added that he would look at strengthening the Patriot Act if elected.  Just in case anyone (like me) opposes Newt's proposal for a half dozen or so new wars, Gingrich plays the standard neocon "ace-in-the-hole" strategy of quoting Abraham Lincoln. "We must think anew and act anew," he quotes Lincoln as saying. I wonder if Newt knows that for the second year in a row, more US soldiers killed themselves (468) than died in combat (462). Suicide is a tragic but predictable human reaction to being asked to kill _ and watch your friends be killed _ for a war based on lies. Perhaps being forced to bag the mangled flesh of fellow soldiers could be another reason why some are committing suicide. Anyway, Newt praises Lincoln's response to Fort Sumter (where not a single person was harmed, let alone killed). In response to the knocking down of some bricks at the fort, Lincoln responded with a full-scale invasion of all the Southern states, waging total war on the civilian population as well, and killing some 350,000 American citizens in those states. This of course was the very definition of "treason" under Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution (the "Treason Clause") which defines treason as only "levying war upon the states" or "giving aid and comfort to their enemies." The Treason Clause provides the only constitutional trial remedy for those who make war against their own nation or give aid and comfort to its enemies. Under this article, there must be TWO witnesses to the supposed act of treason, and the accused is to be tried in CIVILIAN COURT. If the Founders had intended to give the military jurisdiction over such people, what was the point of the Treason Clause? I must emphasize once again that our government considers even ideology and protest to be low-level acts of "terrorism," so if you're anti-war, pro-peace, pro-human rights, pro-justice, anti-corruption, or even worse, if you're a Constitutional Christian, you very well might be labeled a terrorist. Every single square inch of the United States is now a war zone and you or I could easily be declared "soldiers" on the wrong side of the war and treated as such. And according to Senate Bill 1867, no proof, no charges, and no trial are required. They do not even have to draw spurious links to terrorist organizations in order to indefinitely detain you as they could easily declare the evidence as "critical to national security" and thus withhold it for as long as they deem "necessary" to protect "national security." For the first time in American history, military power is being put above that of civil authorities; a move many Russian intelligence analysts say can only be compared to the ending of freedoms in Russia under the Communists and Germany under the Nazis preceding both World Wars of the last century. Perhaps most disturbing are new reports emerging by "Obama-noids" who are warning that Christians are a "national security threat" because they place their belief in God above that of their government. But these political whores are crafty like the Devil. They will use this legislation (initially) on turban wearing "brown people" to set a precedent, but then eventually, they will come for people like me and you. If we don't stand up now against this tyranny, it may soon be too late. There is a famous statement attributed to pastor Martin Niemöller (who died in 1984) about the inactivity of Germans following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. It's called "First They Came..." _ "First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me." If we Americans fail to heed these many warnings of tyranny (like Senate Bill 1867) we will soon awake to a reality described by George Orwell in his seminal work 1984 wherein he warned...."People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word."

The Phony "War on Terror"

The following section was excerpted from Mike Adams’ article entitled "Is the War on Terror a Complete Hoax?"   What if there weren't any real terrorists threatening America and the whole thing was just made up to justify a military agenda? A rational person might say that if we're all going to give up our rights, and our Fourth Amendment, and have U.S. troops in the streets running checkpoints, then logically there should at least be some evidence that America has been infiltrated with terrorists, right? Or, more specifically, evidence from a reliable source that has not already been caught lying about terrorism, which would exclude the federal government, of course. Look around you today: Do you see any terrorists? Any "towel heads" aiming guns at your family? Anybody walking around with a vest full of explosives? Nope.  Have you ever seen the TSA catch a terrorist at the airport? Ever read a news report of the TSA catching a terrorist? Ever heard of an Air Marshall stopping a terrorist in-flight? Nope.  Seriously. Clear the cobwebs out of your head for a moment and think logically: Where are all these "terrorists" that we're supposed to be afraid of and give up our rights for? Where are they? Now, of course, the government can and will, from time to time, stage some sort of terrorist event to remind everyone to be afraid. That's a given. In classic Orwellian protocol, any war that grants a government unlimited power will be indefinitely sustained. This is why the "War on Terror" was declared against a tactic, not a nation or a person. That way, the so-called "war" can be carried out indefinitely. A war with no end. Perpetual tyranny. At first, if you remember, we were told we needed TSA agents at the airports because of Osama Bin Laden, remember? He was the "mastermind" who was going to cause airplanes to fall out of the sky. So what happened after he was killed and removed from the picture? The U.S. government announced the terror threat was now "even higher" because Bin Laden's loyal supporters would now seek revenge! Do you see how, under this brand of sick logic, the war on terror will go on indefinitely? They can always claim someone else is dangerous… there's always a new boogeyman when it serves the interests of the state. That's why it's now obvious that this war has been entirely fabricated to achieve specific political and social agendas. This tactic is straight from the Nazi playbook. The best article yet written on this subject was penned by none other than Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. As Roberts explains: "The US government creates whatever new bogeymen and incidents are necessary to further the neoconservative agenda of world hegemony and higher profits for the armaments industry...If we look around for the terror that the police state and a decade of war has allegedly protected us from, the terror is hard to find. Except for 9/11 itself, assuming we accept the government's improbable conspiracy theory explanation, there have been no terror attacks on the US. Indeed, as RT pointed out on August 23, 2011, an investigative program at the University of California discovered that the domestic "terror plots" hyped in the media were plotted by FBI agents. As there apparently are no real terror plots for this huge workforce to uncover, the FBI justifies its budget, terror alerts, and invasive searches of American citizens by thinking up "terror plots" and finding some deranged individuals to ensnare. For example, the Washington DC Metro bombing plot, the New York city subway plot, the plot to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago were all FBI brainchilds organized and managed by FBI agents." Roberts goes on to explain the real motivation behind the war on terror. It's not to fight terrorism, as has been publicly claimed, but rather to scare Americans into a state of blind obedience to a police state government. The whole "if you see something, say something" campaign is a hypnosis script for mass paranoia. The airport security checkpoints are not designed to make flying safer but to make the American people more terrified. Every element of the so-called "war on terror" is a complete fabrication, just as the original war on Iraq was a total fabrication with its WMDs and fabricated yellowcake uranium claims which turned out to be utter falsehoods. "Terrorism" means, by definition, the use of fear tactics to achieve a political or social goal. There is no better example that fits the definition perfectly than the Department of Homeland Security itself, which is far more interested in figuring out how to INFECT people with fear rather than to PROTECT them from real terrorism. You know who is carrying out the real terror in America today? It's not the "towel heads" (to borrow a vulgar a highly inappropriate phrase from those who push this agenda). No, it's the beer-bellied, white-faced, ego-driven, child-molesting TSA agents who terrorize tens of thousands of innocent air passengers every single day by stripping them down in those secret little rooms behind the security checkpoint naked body scanners — which are themselves another form of electronic strip searches that violate fundamental human rights. And all the people out there who acquiesce to the tyranny, the in-your-pants searches by the TSA, the restrictions of free speech protests, and the coming "secret detainment" provisions just passed by the U.S. Senate, you are all fools and suckers who have been brainwashed into a state of irrational paranoia. It's pathetic. And it's the oldest trick in the government book, of course: Use the fear of terror to manipulate the public into supporting a police state agenda which concentrates power in the hands of the executive branch, which quickly becomes a military dictatorship. Read your history, folks, or you will stupidly repeat it. If we Americans fail to heed these many warnings of tyranny (like Senate Bill 1867) we will soon awake to a reality described by George Orwell in his seminal work 1984 wherein he warned...."People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word."

Does the bill REALLY apply to US Citizens?

There are many of the "sheeple" who say this has nothing to do with United States citizens, as it plainly says in section 1032.  This section the "mandatory" military detention provision—i.e., the idea that a subset of detainable persons ("covered persons" in the lingo of the statute) are not just detainable in theory, but affirmatively must be subject to military detention.  Section 1032 then goes on, in subpart (b), to state expressly that US citizens are exempt from this "mandatory detention" requirement (though lawful permanent residents are not). This obviously rules out the idea of a mandatory military detention for US citizens.  But note that it tends to rule in the idea that the baseline grant of detention authority in section 1031 does in fact extend to U.S. citizens.  Otherwise there would be no need for an exclusion for citizens in section 1032, since the 1032 category is a subset of the larger 1031 category. Bottom line, YES, it has now been confirmed that the indefinite detainment and murder provisions do apply to American citizens on the streets of American cities. As Senator Lindsey Graham explained in plain language on the Senate floor: "...1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland."

Where is the Outrage?

In the words of Mike Adams, "Right now, every history teacher in America should be absolutely outraged about all this, as they know what always comes next in the history of nations. Once any government "legalizes" the murder of its own citizens, it is inevitably followed by a mass-murder holocaust-style event. Tyrants, you see, always like to "legalize" their mass murder before they pull the trigger. Just read the history of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao and others. In every case, they worked diligently to put into place a legal framework for the mass murder that was about to be unleashes on their own citizens. That legal framework looks strikingly similar to Senate Bill 1867, which is about to be passed. This also brings to mind the mathematical reality that, statistically speaking, governments are orders of magnitude more deadly than terrorists. While terrorists sometimes success in taking out a few thousand people at a time, governments routinely murder tens of MILLIONS of people. It's called GENOCIDE, and there's a long and well-documented history of how governments have committed genocide year after year, one nation after another. At the airports, We the People should be searching the TSA employees and checking them for illegal drugs, child pornography and stolen electronics. At government buildings, We the People should be searching all the government employees who come and go to make sure they don't stage the demolition of their own buildings as a way to blame whatever convenient enemy they want to discredit — patriots, conservatives, "conspiracy theorists" or what have you.  It's no longer a conspiracy theory, you see, that the government wants to have the legal right to openly murder U.S. citizens right on the streets of America. It's written right into the Senate bill. It's public record. So all those out there still clinging to their pathetic denialist "conspiracy theorists" rants can now clamp shut their pie holes and throw themselves off a cliff or something. It's time to face the reality of the total police state tyranny that's now written in black and white, plain as day. All of you who are still obsessed with your narrow world view of fashion, dancing with the stars, microwaveable processed food and fake mainstream news are about to be rocked out of your easy chairs and dumped into the cesspool of tyranny at your doorstep. Just know that when they come for you, there will be nobody left to speak for you, because you remained silent as all this was rolled out. And I won't be there for you, either, because I'll be holed up in Texas, handing out emergency food supplies to the local churches and performing emergency medicine procedures on those protesters wounded by U.S. government military attacks — the ones that are still alive, anyway."

CONCLUSION

People, the Bill of Rights is the only thing keeping you alive right now, especially for the liberals who don't usually own firearms to protect themselves. It's the Republicans who are trying to destroy the Bill of Rights these days, don't you get it? All the liberals and progressives reading this should be opposing McCain and the other treasonous Republican Senators who are pushing this "indefinite detainment of American citizens" tyranny. The whole point of the Bill of Rights was the limit government power so that it could not engage in secret arrests, torture, assassinations, indefinite detention and other tactics used by nations like North Korea, China and Cuba. But with Senate Bill 1867, the USA will become a lot like North Korea and China, both of which are filled with secret prisons. All the things we in the USA complain about other nations doing to their innocent citizens (illegal arrests, torture, etc.) will be LEGAL under U.S. law!  This traitorous bill is the equivalent to the Nazi Enabling Act and will spell the end of America as a free nation. Senate Bill 1867 makes it very apparent that "we the people" are the enemy as far as the rogue government is concerned. Ever since the "false flag" attacks of 9/11, our own government has done to the country what no terrorist or terrorist organization could have accomplished. All of the attacks on our Constitutional protections and rights have been perpetrated not by some terrorist in another country, but by terrorists HERE in the USA (our own government). According to Marti Oakley, "It is our own government that has enabled the 17 or more spy agencies in the USA to unlawfully put the country under surveillance, to assemble dossiers on each and every one of us, to track us, film us, listen in on our conversations, read our email and snail mail, and to break into our homes performing illegal searches. It is our own government that has established Fusion centers for local spying and turned various corporate federal agencies into immediate threats to the country. It is our own government that allows TSA to harass and molest us as we travel. Ten years after 9/11 and we are still sitting by idly as bill after bill after bill comes out of this nest of pit vipers we call Congress.  We have become the thing we claimed we despised. All of the crimes we claim are being committed by other countries are crimes we are committing ourselves. We torture, kidnap, bomb, murder, intimidate, abuse and terrify all in the name of "national security." We destabilize economies, deprive entire countries of food, medicines, even water for refusing to submit to what we want. We overthrow governments and assassinate their leaders and then install puppet governments to do our bidding. I have to wonder if at some point if other countries will band together and declare the US a terrorist organization, guilty of crimes against humanity, war crimes, human rights violations and a threat to world peace. If this should ever happen, possibly Carl Levin and John McCain could stand up and wave a copy of S.1867 at them and make them run away." We MUST resist this tyranny. As our Declaration of Independence  says: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government." As George Washington said over 200 years ago... "The time is near at hand which must determine if Americans are to be free men or slaves."  And as Benjamin Franklin warned, "those who sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither." Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn was a Soviet and Russian novelist, dramatist, and historian. Through his writings he helped to make the world aware of the Gulag, the Soviet Union's forced labor camp system.  In Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn  wrote:  "And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn't love freedom enough. And even more _ we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward." I leave you with these telling words from my colleague, Mike Adams, "So one day you call in to talk radio and express your discontent with the President, let's say, and the next day a U.S. marine scout sniper sets up his .338 sniper rifle a couple hundred yards from your house, waits for you to sit down to watch Anderson Cooper vomit out the evening's news propaganda, and then he pulls the trigger and blows your neck off, causing your head to land smack dab in that bowl of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese you were just trying to shovel down your threat because someone told you it was "food." This will all be LEGAL under the new Senate Bill 1867 because they will claim you were a "terrorist collaborator" who questioned the wisdom of the executive leadership of America. Once due process is stripped away, anything can be justified by the government, including the open murder of its own citizens."  

Please pray for our country!  And please help spread the word by sending this newsletter link (http://www.cancertruth.net/enemy-combatant/) to at least 10 friends.

Thanks and God bless.

Follow Cancer Truth Everywhere

The road to health is paved with good intestines

- Sherry A. Rogers

The real cure for what ails our health care system today is less government and more freedom

- Steve Forbes

Modern allopathic medicine is the only major science stuck in the pre-Einstein era

- Charlotte Gerson

The art of medicine consists of amusing the patient while nature cures the disease

- Voltaire

People come up to me and say, ‘I don’t know what to do about cancer I’ve tried everything,’ I say, ‘have you tried nature?

- Mike Adams