ACTION

Some of Senator Rand Paul’s (R, KY) colleagues were left unimpressed by Wednesday’s filibuster.  The day following Paul’s action, Senators John McCain (R, AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R, SC) criticized him, saying Paul was doing a “disservice” to the debate about drones.

When was the last time either McCain or Graham raised concerns over the White House’s use of drones?

“I don’t think what happened yesterday was helpful to the American people…What we saw yesterday is going to give ammunition to those who say the rules of the Senate are being abused,” McCain said.

Since when is proper use of the Senate filibuster abuse?  McCain seems more concerned with getting along with “progressives” in the Senate than preserving the United States Constitution.

Paul was attempting to get the Obama administration to confirm it will not kill non-combatant Americans within the United States.  Graham apparently viewed that as a farcical question.

“I do not believe that question deserves an answer,” Graham stated.

What question would Graham consider worthy of reply?  Do assurances from the DOJ that they will not selectively ignore constitutionally protected rights of American Citizens to judicial due process not qualify?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/mar/7/graham-mccain-blast-paul-filibuster/

Concerns over the administration’s drone program led lawmakers to question Attorney General Eric Holder about legal justification for targeting American Citizens.   Similar concerns prompted Paul to begin his filibuster, demanding answers from the White House.  Paul said he would relent only if the Obama administration stated publically that it will not target Americans on American soil.

The administration apparently believed it could kill Americans it suspected of having terrorist ties without putting them on trial.

Concerns over protection of due process for American Citizens are bipartisan.

“You can hear almost unanimous concern about transparency and wrestling with how to move forward here in a way that protects both our constitutional liberties and our security as a nation,” Senator Christopher A. Coons (D, DE) told Holder.

Under careful examination by Senator Ted Cruz (R, TX), Holder repeatedly stated U.S Citizens on American soil were not “appropriate” targets for executions without due judicial process.  Cruz said that was an insufficient answer.  “You keep saying ‘appropriate.’ My question isn’t about propriety. My question is about whether something is constitutional or not,” said Cruz.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/6/rand-paul-filibusters-brennan-nomination-cia-direc/

McCain and Graham aside, Rand Paul, Christopher Coons and Ted Cruz are on the right side of the debate.

Since McCain and Graham apparently believe it is most important for them to get along with “progressives”, no matter the cost to the Rights of American Citizens at home, their criticism of Paul is out of hand.

Let them face the repercussions in their next election.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/stand-with-rand/

Is anyone surprised that the Senate couldn't get any straight answers from Holder on the possibility of drone strikes on Americans within the U.S.? And why hasn't the outcry over this been louder, with the exception of the fine efforts of Sen. Paul and his handful of allies, in light of this administrations deliberately hazy definition of a drone strike's justification. And yet Holder couldn't decide if he believed the President had the right to order such a strike on U.S. soil? Now this morning something strange happened to Eric Holder. Something that no one has ever seen before. He woke up with a desire to do his job. By now I'm sure that you've heard about his letter to Sen. Paul, about 24 hours too late. "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" "The answer to that question is no." Holder finally admitted.

     The President does not have that authority. But then, he didn't have the authority to force Americans to buy health insurance either. He didn't have the authority to order military strikes against Lybia a few years ago. Although he had the obligation to do so last September 11th, but chose to do nothing. He didn't have the authority to appoint three recess nominations when the Senate wasn't in recess. And the list goes on and on. But now we're expected to believe that no such drone strikes will be ordered on American soil just because the President doesn't have the authority to order them?

     And this administration has done nothing but muddy the definition of terrorist. A few months ago Joe Biden likened conservatives to terrorists. Is that going to be the standard? A person's political or social belief? Or some other form of affiliation? Recently Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, has sent a letter to the Justice Department marking members of Patriot groups as "non-Islamic domestic terrorists". In spite of the fact that there has been no acts of terrorism linked to members of any such group.

     Gone are the good old days when we were just labeled as "racist" for demanding fiscal sanity, a smaller federal government, and adherence to the constitution.  Now the new label is to be "terrorist". And this label might be followed with another nasty little surprise. Authority or no authority.

     So what is considered a terrorist under this administration, and how is that definition likely to be expanded in the near future? If you're opposed to gay marriage, are you a terrorist? If you want a balanced budget, are you a terrorist? If you don't drive a hybrid, are you a terrorist? If you forget to floss, are you a terrorist? Or is that label handed down on the whim of our "glorious and all knowing" dictator, Comrade Obama?

     If you remember to look up at the sky while you're going about your day give a nice wave to the drones up there. After all, they're still just the "friendly" unweaponized surveillance variety. For now. And God bless America. We're going to need all the help we can get.

By Oscar Y. Harward

Americans with our inherited ‘inalienable’ God-given rights and freedoms appears to be moving to a lower level.

‘Face it’!  An American electorate majority has ‘voted’ to turn the USA, our Constitution, and our earlier ‘inalienable’ ‘God-given’ freedoms ‘upside-down’; and away as passed down from our earlier generation(s).

America is living under a ‘lawless’ government of elected and appointed individuals who, themselves, decide whether to ‘obey, enforce, or ignore’ our Constitution and our laws, as they please.

America made a ‘far-left turn’ in 1963 as the SCOTUS verdict in ABINGTON SCHOOL DIST. v. SCHEMPP removed the Holy Bible from our ‘public schools’.  Since that judgment, several generations have failed to hear, study, and/or pass along to later generations the ‘Word of God’. As time passed, I perceived a vision for America to return our nation to the dreams of our Founding Fathers and our US Constitution based on Christian values.

During this same time frame, most regular individuals who practice ‘Christianity’ in their ‘houses of worship’, were spending their money being entertained in professional sports, amphitheaters, movies, and other forms of entertainment, while the ‘lead superstars and movie stars’ themselves, were returning their disproportionate proceeds and take-home revenues to ‘left-wing’ political candidates of election(s) and other ‘radical’ political ideals; representing opposite opinions as these same paying customers usually uphold.

‘Left-wing’ political ‘movers and shakers’ may have won on ‘Liberal’ social, fiscal, and National Security issues; perhaps, forever while many wonder…. How could it have happened?  How did it happen?  What went wrong?  Was I, or am I part of the problem, or am I a solution?

Is it ‘too late’ to return to the dreams of our Founding Fathers and our US Constitution based on Christian values?  Most probably yes; however, nothing is impossible under God’s decree.

Each of us must review our own life and evaluate as to what, how, where, and when we assisted in damaging our Constitution based on Christian values, and our ‘inalienable’ God-given rights and freedoms.  On the differing side, did any of us assist in reinforcing our Constitution based on Christian values, and our nation?

Ronald Reagan said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.”

Have we, as good ‘God-fearing’ Christians fought for, protected, and handed down our freedoms to the next generation(s)?  History will reveal the answer(s) to others.

     I would like to volunteer anytime for a door to door march in any part of our country to wake up the people to what is taking place in our government and how it is going to effect our future generations.  I would like to travel with at least 2 to 3 other people to get our message across.  We would need brocures and possibly gifts for those who might donate.  We would need a list of our canidates, so we can help those to see what we represent.  I'am available anytime and would like to help get across to the public what we letting ourselves in for if we don't do something soon.

                                                                           Thank you and God Bless,

                                                                            A Vietnam Veteran,

                                                                            Bob(Robert) Vozey 

March 7, 2013
"Can I Get a Candy Bar?"
                                        Dear Laissez Faire Today Reader,              

Jeffrey Tucker

Twitter began by calling it "libertarian p**n" -- the longest and most sustained attack on leviathan from the Senate floor in modern history. But then it became more. And more. It went on for 13 hours. It was about halfway through when the junior senator leaned over to an aide and whispered: "Can I get a candy bar?"
  He deserved it. Before the end of the night, the significance of what he was doing was being  described as "epic." What began as a surprise political move became a bipartisan cry against all the evils of our times, which somehow all come down to the egregious power of the executive state and its omnipotent power over our lives and property. It became political theater unlike any we've seen in many years. The target: all terrible things.
  In short, it was a beautiful day on Capitol Hill.
  It all came courtesy of Sen. Rand Paul, the man who has brought truth, excitement, fun, and the appearance of real-life morality back to the Senate.

We aren't used to this. What normal person pays attention to politics, much less to the Senate? Here was something that actually happened -- for once. Something important. Something even... epic.
  This is a story about one man who decided to say, "Enough." It's a so-called "talking filibuster," a last-ditch effort that stops legislative action completely. Something undertaken only in an epic case, a time when there is a hinge of history. Is this that hinge?

Alice in Wonderland? Nicely played, Senator.   "Stand with Rand" and send a clear message to your senator by clicking here.

  Sen. Rand's action began just before noon. He started by standing alone against the nomination of John Brennan for the head of the CIA. This Brennan guy is the top advocate of the drone program and the White House's super-creepy claim of the right to kill American citizens on American soil using unmanned aircraft.
  The White House that wants him appointed refuses to rule out killing you and me if dear leader thinks it is necessary. The policy as fact has been in place for a long time, but this administration wants it formalized.
  Are civil liberties at stake? It's a no-brainer. Well, why is there any controversy about this at all? How much despotism can the American people stand? How did we come to this point? How long will the politicians in Washington pretend like this isn't happening?
  There is an elephant in the living room. That elephant has been nominated to head an agency that has been up to no good since its inception after World War II. An agency that operates in secrecy and embodies everything that is wrong with the whole institution of government. And now some guy who favors the right to kill you and me on a whim has been tagged to head the agency.
  Something's gotta give.
  Sen. Paul seemed to break the taboo. He finally said it: This winner of the Nobel Peace Prize is asserting the right to kill citizens right here, without any recourse to courts or law or anything related to the dead letter called the Constitution. His appointee is ready to do the deed.
  In his first hours, Sen. Paul said: 

"When I asked the president, can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been an easy answer. It's an easy question. It should have been a resounding and unequivocal, 'No.' The president's response? He hasn't killed anyone yet. We're supposed to be comforted by that."

Again, his one question: Why won't the president say that he won't kill noncombatants with drones on American soil? The White House pretended none of this was happening.
    Just before noon yesterday, Rand Paul stood alone. Then others joined him. Still others. Rand talked and talked. He went on and on. The online crowd began to grow. And grow. The tweets grew and grew. Facebook went nuts. It went on all day. The Senate chamber filled up by the evening. The fracas became frenzy and then became a mania. Hashtag #StandWithRand became the Internet meme of the night.
[Ed Note:.  It was nice to have a prominent figure in Washington in the spotlight talking about the issues we brought up in our petition.  If you haven't already checked it out, here's what could be your last chance to "StandwithRand."]
    Here is how the global Twitter map looked a few hours before the filibuster ended, with #StandWithRand as the top hashtag used around the world (the larger the hashtag, reflects a larger number of tweets emanating from that area.)

Everyone else is talking about what this means for the senator's political career. I have high respect for him, but truly, this is not the point. It is not about who is up and who is down. It is about the power of the government over the individual. It's been growing egregiously for a century. It's become absurd to the point that the "peace president" claims the right to kill us. When do we say no?
    Sen. Paul spoke for the multitudes. And he continued. And continued. It was brilliant. It stopped only once biological needs called.
    It's pathetic that it had to come to this to see some meaningful protest. Still. It's thrilling that this protest has finally come. That The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times heaped disdain on the Senator confirms that he was on the right track.
    I have my own theory about the meaning of all of this. I think it is about the digital revolution finally reaching the most impenetrable apparatus on the planet. Sen. Paul was the instrument, but the tune is made of technology.
I must invoke the memory of the prophet of our age Aaron Swartz. He is dead due to horrible hounding by the government. But before he died, he was working on a new software package that was extremely powerful. It offers a way to apply digital media to the cause of politics. He showed the power of his model with the 2012 attack on SOPA. Pretty much working alone, he defeated this cursed legislation that would have disabled the Internet.
    Like most people, I long ago lost faith in the political process. It is a waste of time. It is a game for suckers and fools. The government owns the system, and it will always be so, no matter who is ostensibly in charge.
    Yet... I respect Swartz. He might have been on to something. He posited that there is power when the people can swarm the state apparatus with digital communications: emails, petitions, tweets, memes, digital protests. This is different from regular politics. It is turning the machine upside-down and inside out, bypassing the lobbying, rallies, voting, and electing entirely in favor of direct confrontation between the ruled and the rulers.
    Remember that government is the most paranoid institution on the planet. It is extremely jumpy for that reason. You know how the petty thief is always watching his back, worried that he is going to get caught? Government is like that. It is always and everywhere engaged in criminal activity. It mainly worries about being found out. It fears discovery. Digital media permit every American to say, "You have been found out!"
    Is that what's going on? It has made a difference in this case. The drone issue, which has been a big one for Laissez Faire -- our petition against Brennan and his drone policies gathered 10,000 signatures -- has been one that has sent a powerful signal to the power elite.
    Sen. Paul is a great political entrepreneur. He stepped out in front -- alone at first, but with the whole body behind him eventually, and today a large whole of the people too.
    Government should fear the people. Today, at least some sectors of the government are a bit more afraid than they used to be. My friends, that's victory. It is not about who will gain power next. It is about dismantling power completely, one step at a time.
    "Can I get a candy bar?"
    Someday, that candy will be freedom itself. It's coming. It's going to happen -- with or without our political leaders.
    Sincerely,
    Jeffrey Tucker     Laissez Faire Club

Barack Obama says he wants to ban more classifications of firearms because he  wants to keep Americans safe from gun crime.

Do you believe it?

I don’t believe Obama cares a whit about the safety of the American people – and I think I can prove it.

First of all, the statistics Obama ignores demonstrate conclusively that  firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens actually saves lives. It’s not  even a close call. This fact is illustrated further by the fact that the urban  areas that have outright banned firearms possession have become virtual shooting  galleries, with more Americans being killed in Chicago than in Iraq and  Afghanistan combined.

All that has been said before – not frequently enough, of course – but the  evidence is in on the absolute need for firearms in the hands of American  citizens if we are to remain a free and secure people.

But let me give you the indisputable proof that Obama is lying about his  concerns for the safety and well-being of the American people.

What did his administration do last week in response to the sequestration  budget cuts he himself proposed if an agreement could not be reached with  Republicans to raise taxes?

Without any reason whatsoever, other than to punish American citizens and put  them at risk of life and limb, his Department of Homeland Security pre-emptively  released thousands of illegal-alien criminals from detention. He did this like a  willful child who didn’t get his way – even though he got exactly what he asked  for, as reporter Bob Woodward has documented.

Now what happens when you release illegal-alien criminals onto the streets of  America with no tracking, no monitoring, no oversight, no paperwork? These are  not just illegal aliens who came to America looking for work. They are illegal  aliens who broke into the country and committed serious crimes. Obama’s DHS gave  them get-out-of-jail-free cards.

Does that sound like the act of someone who cares about the safety and  welfare of American citizens?

Does it make sense to disarm American citizens in the wake of actions like  that?

When police chiefs are warning Americans to arm themselves because their  departments no longer have the resources to provide adequate protection to  citizens, is this a responsible action by a caring president?

Of course not.

To top it off, local officials offered to provide facilities to hold those  illegal-alien criminals – at no cost to the federal government. Arizona Sheriff  Joe Arpaio told DHS he’d take those prisoners free of charge and house them at  his Tent City.

“I’ll take them,” he said. “I have room in my tents. I would be happy to have  them – and I wouldn’t even charge them. I would love to take them in the tents.”

Like me, Arpaio doesn’t buy the Obama administration’s story that this move  was done to cut spending.

He said: “I am always suspicious when the government that has billions of  dollars has to say, ‘We are going to release [illegal immigrants] because of  budget problems.’ I’m wary of that. They’re utilizing a budget so-called crisis  as the reason to kick these people loose. I do have a concern about that.”

Obama makes a show of compassion for average Americans, but that’s all it is – sheer demagoguery. I’m convinced his efforts along these lines are  specifically designed to create chaos, not save lives.

It’s like his former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, once said: “Never let a  good crisis go to waste.” Obama doesn’t just wait for crises to happen. He  creates them and exploits them for maximum political advantage.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/proof-obama-is-lying-about-guns/#foiwb506od1DgXWC.99

Barack Obama says he wants to ban more classifications of firearms because he  wants to keep Americans safe from gun crime.

Do you believe it?

I don’t believe Obama cares a whit about the safety of the American people – and I think I can prove it.

First of all, the statistics Obama ignores demonstrate conclusively that  firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens actually saves lives. It’s not  even a close call. This fact is illustrated further by the fact that the urban  areas that have outright banned firearms possession have become virtual shooting  galleries, with more Americans being killed in Chicago than in Iraq and  Afghanistan combined.

All that has been said before – not frequently enough, of course – but the  evidence is in on the absolute need for firearms in the hands of American  citizens if we are to remain a free and secure people.

But let me give you the indisputable proof that Obama is lying about his  concerns for the safety and well-being of the American people.

What did his administration do last week in response to the sequestration  budget cuts he himself proposed if an agreement could not be reached with  Republicans to raise taxes?

Without any reason whatsoever, other than to punish American citizens and put  them at risk of life and limb, his Department of Homeland Security pre-emptively  released thousands of illegal-alien criminals from detention. He did this like a  willful child who didn’t get his way – even though he got exactly what he asked  for, as reporter Bob Woodward has documented.

Now what happens when you release illegal-alien criminals onto the streets of  America with no tracking, no monitoring, no oversight, no paperwork? These are  not just illegal aliens who came to America looking for work. They are illegal  aliens who broke into the country and committed serious crimes. Obama’s DHS gave  them get-out-of-jail-free cards.

Does that sound like the act of someone who cares about the safety and  welfare of American citizens?

Does it make sense to disarm American citizens in the wake of actions like  that?

When police chiefs are warning Americans to arm themselves because their  departments no longer have the resources to provide adequate protection to  citizens, is this a responsible action by a caring president?

Of course not.

To top it off, local officials offered to provide facilities to hold those  illegal-alien criminals – at no cost to the federal government. Arizona Sheriff  Joe Arpaio told DHS he’d take those prisoners free of charge and house them at  his Tent City.

“I’ll take them,” he said. “I have room in my tents. I would be happy to have  them – and I wouldn’t even charge them. I would love to take them in the tents.”

Like me, Arpaio doesn’t buy the Obama administration’s story that this move  was done to cut spending.

He said: “I am always suspicious when the government that has billions of  dollars has to say, ‘We are going to release [illegal immigrants] because of  budget problems.’ I’m wary of that. They’re utilizing a budget so-called crisis  as the reason to kick these people loose. I do have a concern about that.”

Obama makes a show of compassion for average Americans, but that’s all it is – sheer demagoguery. I’m convinced his efforts along these lines are  specifically designed to create chaos, not save lives.

It’s like his former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, once said: “Never let a  good crisis go to waste.” Obama doesn’t just wait for crises to happen. He  creates them and exploits them for maximum political advantage.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/proof-obama-is-lying-about-guns/#foiwb506od1DgXWC.99

Media%20Militia%20concept%20letter.docx

PLEASE....I welcome any feedback/advice anyone can offer.

God Bless.

Joe.

Here repeat after me “EEEENOOOMERATED POWERS”

What separates our Republic and all Republic’s that have come before it is this very singularly important distinction. Enumerated Powers

Here is an excellent interpretation by Kevin Price from his article titled: “What are "enumerated powers" and why do they matter?”

"Enumerated powers" have an academic sound to them. It sounds like something you would read about in a history book. Simply put, enumerated powers are those powers specifically delegated to the Congress by the US Constitution. By the way, they are still there.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution lists the seventeen powers specifically enumerated to the Constitution. All of these things are important and the government's function in these areas was supposed to be strong, in order to protect the liberties of every American. Some of the things delegated to Congress include standard weights and measures, coining money, post offices and post roads, the protection of intellectual property, and a national defense. Beyond these and a few other very specific items, there was not much for which the federal government was responsible.

So how did new medicines get regulated? How would certain industries be licensed? What about the many other things done today by the federal government, who would do them? Those powers not enumerated to Congress were left to others, as seen in the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution: "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." That word, reserved, speaks of exclusivity. This was not a preferential view of public policy ("it would be better if the states and people took care of these things"), but a mandate (if it is not listed in the US Constitution, it is for the states and the people). The vast majority of regulations that exist in states came into place from states watching the works of one another. With the many states, our country had a vibrant laboratory with new ideas being brought to the surface and each state emulated those laws that worked best.

The ideas behind this system are both simple and profound. The state governments had virtually unlimited powers, but limited amounts of money. It could not "print money" to fund its programs, because only the federal government had the power to do such. On the other hand, the federal government only had 17 enumerated powers and it had no reason to use inflation as a vehicle to fund its programs. This contributed to the value of the US dollar remaining steady from the era of the founding until the early part of the 20th century (during the New Deal we began to devalue our currency to pay for "extra Constitutional" or unconstitutional government programs).

The Founders of this republic believed in the dispersion of power. They did such in order to maximize individual freedom and to protect the power of the states. This unique system helped to limit the amount of money taxpayers spent on programs they disagreed with because on the federal level, all the enumerated powers were beneficial to all. Meanwhile, people had the power and freedom to move from state to state in order to find a government that best suited their needs. That power to "vote with their feet" kept most state government very small.”

© Kevin Price

And from the Tenth Amendment Center:

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution is widely cited as being an exhaustive list of Congressional power. But, in reality, there are a total of thirty (up to 35, depending on how they’re counted) Congressional powers that are listed throughout the document. Find them here:

• To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
• To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
• To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
• To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
• To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
• To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
• To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
• To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
• To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
• To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
• To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
• To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
• To provide and maintain a Navy;
• To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
• To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
• To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
• To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
• To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
• No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws:and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress.
• The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
• In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.
• The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
• The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
• The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
• Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
• New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union;
• The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
• The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress
• The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment… The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
• The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.

  There is a difference of opinion in the political arena on whether current interpretation of enumerated powers as exercised by Congress is constitutionally sound.

  One school of thought is called strict constructionists. They often reference a statement on the enumerated powers set forth by Chief Justice Marshall in the case McCulloch v. Maryland:^[3]

  "This government is acknowledged by all, to be one of enumerated powers. The principle, that it can exercise only the powers granted to it, would seem too apparent, to have required to be enforced by all those arguments, which its enlightened friends, while it was depending before the people, found it necessary to urge; that principle is now universally admitted.

  Another school of thought is referred to as loose construction. They often reference additional comments by Justice Marshall from the same case:

  "We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the Government are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended. But we think the sound construction of the Constitution must allow to the national legislature that discretion with respect to the means by which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it in the manner most beneficial to the people. Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional," wrote Marshall.

  Why is a more strict adherence to the intent and measure of Enumerated Powers as defined by the “Federalist Papers” so important? It is what the Greek and Roman Republics did not have to protect them from the tyranny that befell both their Republican forms of government and ended them. Without “Defined Limits” to control one branch of government such as the “Executive” branch, they were destroyed by appointed “Caesar's” that succumbed to the axiom “Absolute power corrupts: absolutely”. They are now just pages in history books.

  Our current Executive branch of government unfortunately now defines the above axiom. If left unabated and continuing on its current trajectory we will no longer exist as founded before the end of this decade and if you think that that time frame is impossible to achieve here is a 20th. Century reminder of man’s folly believing that Govt. has all the answers:

  Weimar Republic:

  The Weimar Republic (German: Weimarer Republik [ˈvaɪmaʁɐ ʁepuˈbliːk] ( listen)) is the name given by historians to the federal republic and parliamentary representative democracy established in 1919 in Germany to replace the imperial form of government. It was named after Weimar, the city where the constitutional assembly took place.

  Following World War I, the republic emerged from the German Revolution in November 1918. In 1919, a national assembly was convened in Weimar, where a new constitution for the German Reich was written, then adopted on 11 August of that same year. The ensuing period of liberal democracy lapsed by 1930, when Hindenburg assumed dictatorial emergency powers, leading to the ascent of the nascent Nazi Party and Adolf Hitler in 1933. The legal measures taken by the new Nazi government in February and March 1933, commonly known as the machtergreifung (seizure of power) meant that the government could legislate contrary to the constitution. The republic nominally continued to exist until 1945, as the constitution was never formally repealed, but the measures taken by the Nazis in the early part of their rule rendered the constitution irrelevant. Thus, 1933 is usually seen as the end of the Weimar Republic and the beginning of Hitler's Third Reich.

  In its fourteen years, the Weimar Republic faced numerous problems, including hyperinflation, political extremists (with paramilitaries – both left and right wing), and continuing contentious relationships with the victors of World War I.

  Regular readers know that I reference this period in history often because it is historically significant that all of the monetary policies as well as the govt. regulatory climate then is identical to now. “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it”

  There is legislation in the House of Representative's that could slow and stop the current momentum of Un-Constitutional legislation if we can elect Citizen Statesman and not the “Political Ruling Class” that now occupies the District of Corruption.

  H.R. 450 (111th): Enumerated Powers Act:

  From Downsize DC:

  Representative John Shadegg (R-AZ) has re-introduced The Enumerated Powers Act (EPA) - HR 450. (You can read the entire bill on our Background Page.) EPA would require Congress to reference the specific clause(s) of the U.S. Constitution that grant them the power to enact laws and take other congressional actions.

  "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce." —James Madison, Federalist No. 45

  So what difference will it make if we require them to cite "chapter and verse" the section of the Constitution that gives them authority to pass a law, create or maintain a program, or impose a tax?

  • Well, it might slow them down.
  • It might mean that they reconsider a proposal instead of introducing it.

  But we freely admit, this new law won't stop them.

  We believe the real power of this requirement is that it would, over time, build the evidence necessary to make some real reforms. After all, how many different, un-constitutional actions per day can they blame on the Commerce Clause before a judge rules or a reforming group stands up and says, "This is a hole large enough to drive a fleet of trucks through; let's tighten it up!"

  EPA might even, eventually, embarrass Congress. As Walter Williams has pointed out, "Congressmen, openly refusing to live up to their oath of office, exhibit their deep contempt for our Constitution." EPA would expose these politicians because their actions would speak louder than their phony rhetoric.

  There's an old Texas legend that says, a young politician by the name of Lyndon Johnson (yes, that Lyndon Johnson), was looking for an edge in his campaign. Johnson suggested to his campaign manager that they start a rumor that his opponent enjoyed sexual congress with pigs.

  His campaign manager reacted in shock: "Lyndon you know that's not true."

  "Sure," Lyndon is alleged to have replied, "I just want to watch him deny it."

  Well, Congress does lots of unconstitutional things. And that's no rumor. Walter Williams is almost certainly right; most members of Congress seem to have "deep contempt for our Constitution."

  Now, we just want to see them compelled to deny that charge.

  Contact your representative and demand they sign on and support passing this legislation and if they don’t then you know who the traitor’s are.

  In Freedom,

  Dr. Keith C. Westbrook                                                                                                                                                     Pres. Conservative Party-Florida

Obummer who think he is some kind of dictator that he has stopped people from touring the White House which belongs to the people of the United States of America. That’s the peoples house not his. It was built with American taxes, along with a lot of American lives have died defending it. This Clown is only a short time user, he should thrown out on the street and find his own place to live. It belongs to the people.

Give an average American 30 days of running this Country and we would be out of debt. And not giving money to people who wish to kill Americans.

Now I know why this Clown belongs to the Jackass party when he specks it always comes out the wrong end.

                        It seems someone in Washington is beginning to listen to We the People.  Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA), Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and Congressman Jim Gerlach (R-PA), a Ways and Means Committee member, sent a letter to Secretary of State John “Lurch” Kerry telling him they want to speak with the thirty or so “invisible” Americans present in Benghazi the night of the attack on the consulate http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/republican-congressmen-to-sec-kerry-give-us-benghazi-survivor/.  Kerry will refuse and Republican “leadership” will sandbag this until it gets overridden by a new “crisis”, if We the People let them.  It is up to us to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

Read More:

http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/03/republican-congressmen-want-answers-on-benghazi/

Fox news published a piece about a Florida lawmaker wanting to ban the sale of ammo unless the buyers completed an anger management class first, see here:

  Anger Management Course

This is my email to Ms. Audrey Gibson ( the lawmaker in question) -

Dear Ms. Gibson,

You have my condolences on your lack of understanding of the Second  Amendment.  It says:  “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

First, if you study the quotes of our Founding Fathers, you will discover that a Militia, as they spoke of it, was a group of Citizens who were normally employed else wise.  Whereas an Army was employed by the State or Republic for that sole purpose. 

Also, the Second Amendment refers to the security of a free State.  This is not talking about using the gun to go hunting but to defend oneself and ones’ home, city and state from injustice.  In other words, the 2^nd Amendment is referring to defending ones immediate area against a tyrannical and/or uncontrolled GOVERNMENT or invaders like the UN.

And, lastly, the 2^nd Amendment says that these rights “shall not be infringed”.   In other words – MAKE NO LAW RESTRICTING THEM - - AT ALL!!!!!

And - - my dear lady - - that does include the ammo necessary to allow them to be used to defend oneself against a government gone wild.  Sorry to say – but that is becoming more and more the case today!

Sincerely,

A US Citizen who is concerned with ANY elected official breaking these laws in the Bill of Rights!!

Pixie

A week ago, Congress said that it appeared Mr. Obama might be doing things that were not in the best interests of America or its Citizens.. The release went on to say that if it were discovered Mr. Obama's actions were malicious and deliberate - this is an Impeachable offence!

I would like to know how Congress can sit idly by while this administration deliberately and maliciously destroys this economy and the wellbeing of its Citizens - ignoring Federal Law and the Constitution - and continues to allow Mr. Obama to do whatever he will. How can this be? The excuse of gridlock in Congress has worn extremely thin and this can no longer be provided as a valid excuse. Essentially; the elected are in Congress to support citizens concerns - not their own agenda... If elected are blindly following a political agenda contrary to what is right for this Nation and its people they just might be placing themselves in a position that is not sustainable to their own wellbeing...... We the People just might fire them at the very first opportunity - regardless of their political party!

There are few but notable exceptions to the above and these men and women in Congress have become Hero's to the American public - and they are from both sides of the aisle! The rest of Congress should take strong and immediate note of this - as in failing to take note of it - will almost certainly find themselves in the unemployment line come the next election.

Citizens do not want "amnesty" for illegal aliens... very recent polls prove beyond a shadow of doubt that more than 70% of Americans favor deporting illegal aliens. And as a sidebar; We really do not appreciate this administration's manipulation of the English language to redefine the term "illegal alien" to "undocumented immigrant". To allow this is political pandering at its worst! These illegal aliens came to our country illegally (hence the term and dictionary definition) - and Mr. Obama wants to place them at the front of the line to gain citizen and voting status AHEAD of those who have been  lawfully  waiting years to gain entrance to this Nation?  How can this be in the best interests of the Nation? All this "amnesty" idea of his does is increase the number of people in welfare programs and place additional burden (11 Million of them)  on taxpayer shoulders! We already have at least 25 Million Americans either unemployed or under employed - how is adding 11 million more people to the job lines in our interests?

I submit it is a political ploy to gain more "voters" for Mr. Obama!

Grounds:

On February 8, 2013 Mr. Obama signed a presidential memorandum that overturned the 1997 prohibition against funding the Palestinian Authority (Hamas) - a known terrorist organization. He had previously funded them $192,000,000.00 ($192 Million) in 2012 and $400,000,000.00 ($400 Million) in 2010 - in defiance of Congress. The act of defying Congress in 2010 and 2012 quite possibly treasonous - while overturning the 1997 prohibition in 2013 extremely unwise in the face of current World events - at minimum.

Mr. Obama has made unprecedented expansions to social and welfare programs - contrary to the original intent of these programs - this has done nothing to enhance the economy of the Nation, rather it has encouraged those in these programs to remain a burden to the US taxpayer costing (2011 report) $1,028,000,000,000.00 ($1.028 Trillion) annually and works to increase our Federal deficit. In August of 2012 Mr. Obama removed the "seek work" requirement from welfare - promoting this burden to continue on the taxpayer.

All reporting economists agree; this act does nothing to encourage those in these programs to gain employment and they remain a burden to the taxpayer - at the above listed cost to taxpayers.......

To date; Mr. Obama has funded - with taxpayer dollars - more than $10,000,000,000.00 ($10 Billion) to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, he has also sent them 20 F-16 Fighters and 200 M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks.  He has spent $1,000,000,000.00 ($1 Billion) on a fleet of  WWII German submarines for them!

The Muslim Brotherhood who runs the Egyptian government  is linked by several intelligence agencies - foreign and domestic - to al-Qaeda. They have installed Sharia Law and are actively persecuting Christians and anyone who disagrees with what they dictate.

Just last week Mr. Obama  gave them another $250,000,000.00 ($250 Million)!

The Department of Homeland Security just spent $50,000,000.00 ($50 million) in Mexico for new employee uniforms - yet cuts the budget of the Border Patrol and releases violent felon illegal aliens on US streets... all the while claiming they had to do it because of sequestration. First of all, I agree civil servants need to be fiscally responsible with taxpayer money and get the best deals possible - but in this Nation's current economic climate - foolishness to the extreme,  spending this amount of money in Mexico instead of reinvesting said money in the US economy.......

On releasing violent felon illegal aliens on US streets? I cannot fathom how this could be interpreted as anything other  than a criminal act and a political ploy crafted to cause fear among citizens (rightfully so, the fear appears to be warranted!).

According to reports; This administration has funded $697,177.00 for a climate change musical, $100,000.00 for a climate change video game, $325,000.00 for robotic squirrels, $99,000.00 for hard alcohol, $400,000.00 for an oil portrait of a senior government official, $4,000,000.00 ($4 Million) for an IRS television studio,  $947,000,000.00 ($947 Million) for a NASA  "mission to Mars" menu - the list is almost endless!

To date; the US taxpayer has spent $1,400,000,000.00 ($1.4 Billion) on personal services and vacations for Mr. Obama... twenty-four (24) of them, which is more than all previous Presidents COMBINED!

It has become patently obvious to all but the deranged that this administration has a spending problem and cannot stop throwing taxpayer dollars down obscure rabbit holes. The actions immediately prior and subsequent to Sequestration showcase the issues:

Mr. Obama spends obscene amounts of taxpayer dollars on things Congress and Citizens do not approve of - and then furloughs Federal Workers without pay.... claiming he cannot afford to pay them because of sequestration.

This is lunacy and quite untrue! The truth is; if this administration would quit spending we would not have "sequestration" and there might be a chance of recovery within this fiscal year!

What we have all seen are deliberate political acts that are malicious and designed to deplete whatever funds we as a Nation still have and cause the most "pain" as possible during this sequestration. Today e-mails from the white House were leaked that state this exact thing, allegedly coming from Mr. Obama himself!

It does not take a Doctorate to research and understand what past Presidents - and this one - have spent during their tenure. It is actually quite easy to discover this administration has spent our Nation into poverty and continues to do so every day of the world. Current (November 2012) estimates have this administration spending $11,000,000,000.00 ($11 Billion) dollars a day - with revenues of only $5,000,000,000.00 ($5 Billion) dollars a day. This is not sustainable by any measure - with the exception of possibly a cartoon (a very bad cartoon). This administration has created a National deficit of more than $6 Trillion dollars on its watch  - more than all previous Presidents in the history of this Nation combined!

How can this possibly be rationalized as sustainable or in the best interests of this Nation or its peoples? I submit it is not sustainable and if Congress does not stop the hemorrhaging of taxpayer dollars very soon we will eventually reach a point where a taxpayer revolt will occur - one brought upon us by this administration and the lack of action by Congress.

So who is at fault here?

I submit the fault lies primarily within the executive branch (for being criminally irresponsible and continuing to spend what we do not have)  - but fault also lies within Congress, as they have had ample opportunity to put a stop to it - did not, and kept their collective (with above noted exceptions) head's down to escape notice.

The bottom line: If Congress fails stand up for citizens rights, fails to "pull the plug" and defund things like "obamacare", the EPA, DHS, etcetera.... we will soon be facing a crisis far worse than a Constitutional crisis.

Aubrey Mason

March 6, 2013

I wrote another letter to my Representatives US Senators Marco Rubio and Bill nelson, and House of Representative Congressman Bill Posey.

Date : 03/06/2013 Time - 11:50 am

Issue : NO AMNESTY - ILLEGAL ALIEN IN OUR OVAL OFFICE ALSO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Respected Representatives,

I just received this reply from US Senator Bill Nelson of Florida and I am greatly disappointed in our Representatives decision. There are millions of AMERICANS out of work and you want to keep nearly 12 to 20 million ILLEGAL ALIENS that are sucking away very precious US CITIZEN PAID RESOURCES ? DO YOU WANT TO CUT ENTITLEMENTS AND WASTED EXPENSES FROM THIS GOVERNMENT ??? DO OUR SO-CALLED REPRESENTATIVES IN OFFICE NOW WANT TO JOIN THESE ILLEGAL INVADERS OF OUR COUNTRY IN DESTROYING THIS NATION ?

THIS IS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TAX PAYER SUPPORT FOR ENEMY INVADERS OF THIS COUNTRY ROBBING THE COUNTRY OF OUR PRECIOUS TREASURE.

This is the response letter I received.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this e-mail. If you need to send another message to Senator Nelson, please use the form on his Web site: http://billnelson.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm#email

Dear Mr. Gamble:

Thank you for sharing your concerns about immigration reform. No matter how anyone feels about this issue, we all can agree the system we have is broken--and it needs to be fixed.

But if we try to deport the 11 million people who are working in this country with undocumented status, it would devastate our economy. So, I agree with the bipartisan group of senators, that there are steps we can take to ensure we're not amplifying the problem.

Their plan for immigration reform has a number of key elements, the first of which is that there is going to have to be real border security. It's hard to patrol a border of thousands of miles, particularly where people can merely walk across. But it has to be done in the context of overall immigration reform.

We also need to have an effective way for employers to verify whether the people they hire are eligible to work here. This also has to be part of any immigration reform.

I think the principles laid out for them by the bipartisan group are very good. Anyone who is here must follow the rules, not have a criminal record, pay a fine, learn English, and go to the end of the line to have an opportunity to get a green card. Those who are unwilling to play by these rules should be deported.

Be assured that in this debate I'll work to strengthen border security and for the creation of a guest-worker program that is functional. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future.

Sincerely,
Bill Nelson

P.S. From time to time, I compile electronic news briefs highlighting key issues and hot topics of particular importance to Floridians. If you'd like to receive these e-briefs, visit my Web site and sign up for them at http://billnelson.senate.gov/news/ebriefs.cfm

----------------------------------------------------------

This is TOTALLY DISGUSTING that our so-called REPRESENTATIVES will let FOREIGN INVADERS come into our country, ILLEGALLY STEAL FROM THE CITIZENS THE TAXES THEY PAID FOR SUPPORT OF THIS COUNTRY and then GIVE THEM AMNESTY FOR THEIR CRIMINAL ACTS.

If you want to support them, TAKE IT OUT OF YOUR PAY AND DO IT IN ANOTHER COUNTRY !

We are tired of this crap ! DO YOUR JOBS FOR US CITIZENS ! There are millions of US CITIZENS THAT NEED JOBS !

Send all those ILLEGAL SPONGES back where they came from.

Criminal INDONESIAN CITIZEN FALSE PRESIDENT OBAMA IS ANOTHER ILLEGAL ALIEN YOU IDIOTS LET STEAL OUR HIGHEST GOVERNMENT OFFICE.

YOUR INCOMPETENCE ALLOWED A KENYAN BORN MUSLIM COMMUNIST INTO OUR GOVERNMENT OFFICES. Now, even under a so-called 'Sequester' this criminal is sending support to ISLAMIC RADICALS...while the US CITIZENS are being threatened with WHITE HOUSE RETALIATIONS by cutting services and even eliminating VOLUNTARY TOURS THRU THE WHITE HOUSE...

EVERY REPRESENTATIVE that votes to allow these criminals in this country will have my total rejection and I WILL ADVOCATE VERY LOUDLY EVERY WHERE I GO AND I WILL EXPRESS THIS OPINION TO EVERY ONE I KNOW.

I have HUNDREDS of friends on social sites...and those friends also have hundreds of friends...AND WE WILL BE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR COME ELECTION TIME, I GUARANTEE YOU THAT FACT.

You all had better start getting your effects packed and ready to head back to what ever home you have left if you keep this crap up. You will be out of a job and when we finally do take this country back to were it needs to be, THERE WILL BE NO FREE RIDES FOR PAST REPRESENTATIVES EITHER....ANY OF THEM AND NO PUBLIC SECRET SERVICE PROTECTION OR OTHER BENEFITS OF ROYALTY THAT YOU ARE GETTING USED TO IN OUR GOVERNMENT OFFICES.

Signed as a VERY DISGUSTED TAX PAYING CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Robert Gamble - 82nd Airborne Artillery 1977

https://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=-iYtzGHTLJk&feature=endscreen

• The word Liberal is derived from the Latin liber, free. Liberal implicates freedom or less control, yet in order to achieve its goals in context to the current Liberal Left Wing movement it uses total control.
• The Liberal pre-disposition for policy making uses low EQ(emotional quotient) architecture for its legislation to capture and tap into the proletariats emotional reactions to social issues and events, in order to impose their core values. This legislation is therefore based on the fallacy of focusing on emotional decision making instead of logical problem solving. An example may be legislating harsh gun control in response to the Sandy Hook massacre when gun control historically has failed and at times even led to more violence in society.
• By proxy Liberalism subjugates personal freedom by relieving individuals of the burden of responsibility of their actions by creating legislation to make decisions for individuals forcing them to submit through law, rule and regulation and ultimately total control.
• Conservatism does not imply total freedom but it does allow individuals the responsibility of personal choice, liberalism supersedes conservatism by putting the burden of choice in the hands of the government.

• Liberalism focuses its economic solutions on artificial stimuli instead of organic growth. The left uses manipulation of money supply and interest rates, regulation of the free market and the distribution of wealth to create a cycle of dependency where the gainfully employed must work harder and harder to support a growing number of the population utilizing government subsidies to sustain themselves. Although these individuals are using their subsidies for consumer spending it is only relative to the marginal rate of subsidies being allocated not the increase of disposable income based on new market growth and new job creation. The cycle of dependency leads to the collapse of the middle class, the stagnation and ultimately the collapse of the monetary and/or financial system.

Freedom Outpost’s Constitutional scholar Publius Huldah recently explained why Federal gun laws are unlawful. She noted that the first gun control measures put in place in the United States did not take place until 1927, when Congress banned the mailing of certain weapons. “We went from 1776 to 1927, 150 years after our founding, when Congress decided, “We better start disarming the American people.”

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/all-federal-gun-laws-are-unconstitutional/#ixzz2MjVS8NoZ

 In an explosive report set to send shockwaves through official Washington, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released a 108-page GAI investigation into the threat of foreign and fraudulent Internet campaign donations in U.S. federal elections (visitcampaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report).

  I am a seeker of TRUTH sharing it with others. Sometimes truth frightens people which is not my intent. My intent is for everyone to claim their own power through knowledge! Everyone has untapped Energy within themselves and truth channeled into LOVE for each other and all things can change our world, we do have the Power on our side! We ARE the Power together and able to change it all through LOVE and LIGHT! I got an email from someone who I know and is part of the Tennessee State Militia/Guard.
The various units of the Tn. State Guard are listed here. 

Let me explain the Tennessee State Guard first.   22 Governors got together last year and created State Militia/Guards that can not be federalized as the National Guards can be.  They also did this due to the Federal government taking the equipment from the National Guards and sending it over to Iraq and Afghanistan.  When the Governors have requested the equipment back for the state the Federal government has said "It is too expensive to bring back."  The states have had to do without equipment for any emergencies of the individual states.

The governors decided they would form their own State Militias/Guards that can not be controlled by the federal government at any time and they are strictly under the State control along with all the equipment purchased.

The person who contacted me, did so due to my article about the DHS armored vehicles and the picture I took of one when I was in Kentucky. 

Here are the pictures I took.
 

Armored DHS vehicle in Kentucky

Armored DHS vehicle in Kentucky

The email with this information is from someone I have the utmost respect for.


Here is the contents of the  email from the person who is part of the Tennessee State Militia and was at a meeting a couple of weeks ago after getting the following email from them today 3/4/13 regarding the above Armored DHS vehicles.

 

At our last "meeting" several weeks ago, we were advised by a High Ranking Official of the State Guard that they stopped vehicles of this type coming from KY into TN. The troops were wearing very distinct uniforms for the Dept. of Homeland Security that were not recognized and the men they stopped were Eastern European, probably Russian. Apparently, there is some type of FEMA/DHS camp somewhere in Kentucky? 

 After receiving the above email, we spoke on the phone, I wanted to find out more information about the Russian/Eastern European DHS troops that were handling the armored vehicles.

During our phone conversation.  They told me that the uniforms were not typical DHS uniforms but they had Eagles on their sleeves and it was stressed these were different DHS uniforms than regular ones.   The Russian/Eastern troops were not armed that were in the DHS uniforms and they were very polite to the State Militia.  They were stopped from coming into Tennessee.  This person told me that in Gatlinburg, Tennessee people are reporting being questioned and stopped by DHS that are Russian.   I was also told that the high ranking official mentioned Kentucky FEMA camps.


I wrote about how I found out the Smoky Mountains are part of the UN last year, as most of our National Parks, including the Grand Canyon after I saw a plaque (took pictures of it) at Newfoundland Gap last year.

After speaking with this person, I have to wonder if Russian UN troops are now being placed around the Smoky Mountains.

I have researched and found what could be the Military installation that the armored vehicle came from pictured in the area of Kentucky, I saw them.   It is The Bluegrass Army Chemicals installation of 14600 acres.    That installation has 523 tons of Nerve Chemical weapons.   It is also a possible FEMA camp.  It has a very strange layout.  All of that information is in the video:

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/03/tennessee-state-militiaguard-has-stopped-dhs-armored-vehicles-from-kentucky-russians-with-dhs-eagle-uniforms-2583388.html?utm_content=beforeit39snews-floatingtoolbar&utm_term=http%3A%2F%2Fawe.sm%2Fs0925&utm_source=http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2Fq7g0Mr8pog&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=