Have you ever checked a “Terms of Service” agreement without reading it? Have you ever been less-than-truthful in an email or social network?
Then you may be a criminal. At least, that’s what the Justice Department claims, and they want to strengthen the law to ensure that they have the power to prosecute you.
The U.S. Senate is about to take some law enforcement powers from the Justice Department, and give greater policing powers to the Department of Defense. These policing powers can (and will) be used on American soil. It appears that, under just two small sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1867). . .
1. American citizens and lawful resident aliens, could be held, INDEFINITELY, jailed.
2. Other persons can be DISAPPEARED by the military, without benefit of habeas corpus or trial. And worse…
3. These other persons can also be shipped off to a foreign judicial system that might deliver a result the Justice Department wants.
The sponsors of this bill claim that this bill contains no new powers — that they’re merely codifying the behavior of two (renegade) administrations.
Yet two of the bill’s Senate backers admit there is a new power: The ability of the military to engage in police work on American soil — Posse Comitatus be damned.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who backs the bill, indicated that the bill “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”
In 1031 the Federal State gains the power of indefinite imprisonment without trial. In 1032, American citizens and lawful resident aliens must be given civilian jails for their potentially permanent stays, and cannot be shipped off for a show trial by a convenient foreign power.
That’s why I wrote the following letter. We encourage you to write a letter of your own, or copy or borrow from this…
The Patriot Act should never have been passed. Ten years later, it should be repealed for at least four reasons…
First, the Patriot Act attacks the First Amendment…
* Americans can be investigated for what they read and write, and what websites they’ve visited
* The Feds can “gag” my bank, my librarian, and my Internet Service Provider, preventing them from telling me if I’m under investigation
Second, it undermines the Fourth Amendment… Read More »
If you had a chance to stop Obamacare, AND advance the Tenth Amendment right of the various states, to interpose and even to nullify actions that restrict the liberties of individual citizens, would you want to take it?
There has been a flurry of activity in the Supreme Court as the U.S. Department of Justice and other litigants have filed petitions seeking review by the nation’s highest court of the constitutionality of Obamacare. There is no doubt that the Court will agree to hear most of these cases. But one case might not make the cut.
The Commonwealth of Virginia has challenged the Obamacare provision that mandates individual Virginians must purchase a health insurance policy approved by the federal government.
The Virginia suit was decided on the merits, in favor of Virginia, in the district court, but was then reversed on appeal by the 4th Circuit Appeals Court. The appeals ruling was NOT on the merits (or Obamacare probably would’ve lost), but on the ground that Virginia had no legal “standing” to sue. This panel, all of whom were appointed by a Democratic President, ruled that . . . Read More »
Quote of the Day: “It isn’t illegal if the President does it.” — Richard M. Nixon
We have re-launched a campaign to impeach the President. The sample letter below will explain why we have done this.
WARNING: Those who maintain partisan loyalties may wrongly believe we are pursuing this campaign for partisan reasons, or out of personal animosity for the President. Nothing could be further from the truth. We want to make this clear . . .
Our organization is legally non-partisan, and temperamentally ANTI-partisan.
We distrust all political parties, and all politicians.
We take NO position for partisan political reasons, for the simple reason that we have NO partisan political loyalties, AT ALL.
Instead, we are doing this because we think the legal situation requires it. The sample letter below will explain in more detail. But . . . out of respect for those who may disagree . . . we are placing this campaign on the “Heresies” page on our website. As always, you are a free to disagree with us, and to tell us you disagree.
On the other hand, if you strongly support our position, you may want to help us notify the media about it (see more details below the sample letter).
Quote of the Day: “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” – The Book of Revelation 13:17
Many reading this have spent years fighting successfully against REAL ID. It seems a shame to lose the battle now simply because the politicians have finally found something — immigration — that scares enough people to make us submit.
We understand that some people who say they want to shrink the federal state just as much as we do, still support E-Verify. They claim this new dictate is needed to combat illegal immigration. We seem to be “heretics” in this case because we believe… Read More »
From Chris Powell of the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee comes the news:
Last week U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, held a hearing on his proposed Free Competition in Currency Act of 2011 (H.R. 1098), which would repeal legal tender laws, restrictions on private mints, and taxes on gold and silver, since such taxes interfere with the metals’ circulation as money. Testifying were the executive director of the Foundation for the Advancement of Monetary Education, Lawrence M. Parks, and George Mason University Economics Professor Lawrence H. White. Video of the hearing is not quite an hour long and you can watch it here:
The full text of the legislation is simple and concise and can be found here:
The legislation would seem to legalize the Liberty Dollar coins whose issuer recently was convicted on vague charges in federal court in North Carolina. Professor White quotes New York Sun editor and Wall Street Journal contributor Seth Lipsky to the effect that it doesn’t make much sense to suppress private money that is sound to protect money that is unsound.
Unfortunately the Free Competition in Currency Act has no co-sponsors and its introduction and this week’s hearing seem to be mainly an educational exercise. But that’s where everything starts.
CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.
Civil asset forfeiture is government seizure of property and cash, even when the owner isn’t charged of a crime. Innocent owners must go through a costly, time-consuming process to get their property back — and even then they may be denied. Police departments get to sell the seized property and keep most of the proceeds. If you’re unfamiliar with this form of legalized theft, we recommend you learn more on our End Asset Forfeiture page.
On Tuesday, September 13, Peter Schiff, the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, www.europac.net will testify before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs, Stimulus Oversight and Government Spending. The hearing entitled, “Take Two: The President’s Proposal to Stimulate the Economy and Create Jobs” will examine federal job creation efforts. Mr. Schiff, author of many best-selling books including “How an Economy Grows and Why it Crashes” is well known for his views on how federal regulatory activism and irresponsible monetary and fiscal policy is actively destroying jobs in America. The following statement from Mr. Schiff will be read into the Congressional Record this morning. Within a few days, video of the hearings will be available on the Committee’s website. Please feel free to excerpt or repost with the proper attribution and all links included.
How the Government Can Create Jobs
Testimony by Peter D. Schiff
Offered to the House Sub-Committee on Government Reform and Stimulus Oversight
September 13, 2011
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking member, and all distinguished members of this panel. Thank you for inviting me here today to offer my opinions as to how the government can help the American economy recover from the worst crisis in living memory.
Despite the understandable human tendency to help others, government spending cannot be a net creator of jobs. Indeed many efforts currently under consideration by the Administration and Congress will actively destroy jobs. These initiatives must stop. While it is easy to see how a deficit-financed government program can lead to the creation of a specific job, it is much harder to see how other jobs are destroyed by the diversion of capital and resources. It is also difficult to see how the bigger budget deficits sap the economy of vitality, destroying jobs in the process.
In a free market jobs are created by profit seeking businesses with access to capital. Unfortunately Government taxes and regulation diminish profits, and deficit spending and artificially low interest rates inhibit capital formation. As a result unemployment remains high, and will likely continue to rise until policies are reversed.