FBI Director Comey – Just who is he?

Yesterday I had my tin foil out in fine style and suggested that the FBI use of informants particularly in terrorism cases was often not what it appeared in the post Was the Orlando terrorist Mateen an FBI informant?

Setting aside my screed, let me offer another point of view of FBI director Comey who almost universally is depicted as a white hat in shining armor, at this very moment holding the future of the Democrat party in his hands. We are apparently in the process of giving up due process in order to achieve a modicum of gun control. The new NDAA is soon up for a vote. Just who will be looking over our shoulder?Just who is FBI Director Comfey?James B. Comey, new F.B.I. nominee is not what you think 

What you will not hear from the Obama-friendly media, and our somnolent members of Congress, is this: Not only was the Patriot Act expanded under the supervision of Comey, Mueller and Ashcroft, when Comey left the AG’s office in 2005 he went to work as the top lawyer for…wait for it…”Big Brother” himself – Lockheed Martin.

As the Chief Legal Officer at Lockheed Martin, James Comey earned a total compensation of $6,113,797.00 in 2009. That’s right. Six million bucks. In one year.

When most people hear Lockheed Martin they think military contracts. Well, welcome to 1984. “Big Brother” is another name for Lockheed Martin, and security and surveillance is their game. They’ve been working closely with the National Security Agency (AKA: NSA, as in No Such Agency) for many years.

So ask yourself: Why would the Obama regime appoint a new FBI Director who works for a prime contractor that sells NSA the technology to spy on Americans? Would PETA hire a fur coat distributor?

Oh, by the way, where’s John Ashcroft today? Why he’s on the Board of Directors of Blackwater USA,which now goes by the harmless sounding name – Academi – conjuring up images of ivy-covered buildings and lounging intellectuals.

So in the days ahead, when the media and politicians tell you that James B. Comey will stand up for your civil liberties as FBI Director (citing a hospital room performance over the Patriot Act), remember: If Comey didn’t support spying on Americans, why would he work for a leading company that sells the government the tools to spy on Americans?

Are the manufacturers of hunting rifles against hunting?

Comey and Ashcroft – Lockheed Martin and Blackwater: Defenders of our civil liberties?

And just to round out what the FBI is about, let’s hear from the previous director.

FBI Director: I have to check to see if Obama can kill citizens on U.S. soil January 26, 2013

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.
Pressed by House lawmakers about a recent speech in which Holder described the legal justification for assassination, Mueller, who was attending a hearing on his agency’s budget, did not say without qualification that the three criteria could not be applied inside the U.S.
“I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller said when asked by Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga., about a distinction between domestic and foreign targeting. Graves followed up asking whether “from a historical perspective,” the federal government has “the ability to kill a U.S. citizen on United States soil or just overseas.”
“I’m going to defer.

Obama vetoes NDAA – Defense funding of our military

After spending hours watching Hillary dance rings around the GOP during the hearing yesterday, my tired fingers did not feel compelled to opine in written form. So let us give the attention to the real heroes of the day and every day that keep us warm and safe so we may go about and enjoy our lives while they put theirs on the line.

Obama in a fit of peek, couldn’t get his way totally, so he vetoes the NDAA. Did it get any attention? Did you even know about it? He had the press in for a picture-taking affair. Why did he veto it? Because of nothing to do with defense. Rather, finally funding that monstrosity that McConnell and Boehner foisted on us that striped our military.

Democrats were particularly upset over Republican attempts to circumvent the across-the-board spending cuts known as sequestration that began in 2013, saying they could not accept any increases in military spending without equivalent increases for other programs.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Thursday vetoed the annual defense policy bill that includes troop pay and benefits — as well as historic personnel reforms — making good on a promise to oppose Republicans on spending.

Obama rejected the bill because it funnels about $38 billion in daily DOD expenses through Overseas Contingency Operations, which allowed Republicans to fully fund defense while avoiding a larger debate over removing caps on federal spending.

The 2016 NDAA includes a $515-billion base defense budget that lays out troop pay, personnel benefits and policy for DOD, and the $89-billion war fund called Overseas Contingency Operations. It calls for an historic reform of the 20-year pension system, hikes in Tricare fees, protections for the A-10 Thunderbolt II and a review of troops carrying personal guns on bases, among a raft of other initiatives.

More at Stripes

RINO’s and Dems join in cutting military benefits. Merry Christmas Scrooge

Onward we go with the Omnibus spending bill. Forget that within a month we will control Congress. By all means, let us “do” the NDAA as well and apparently screw the military. Perfect. Here is Hugh Hewitt and his take on it. But first look at the other pork present that the GOP is adding, but of course we cannot be fair to our military.We can only imagine what else we will find out because we have to pass the bill to find out what is in it.

Congress Includes Land Grab Provisions in National Defense Authorization

Some lawmakers negotiated the inclusion of land grab provisions in the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which will expand the already massive federal real state holdings.

The Senate aide told Breitbart News that highlights of the lands provision include:

  • 275,000 acres designated as new Wilderness Areas;
  • A Women’s History Museum;
  • Four new National Parks seven National Park studies for new parks to be;
  • 16 National Heritage extensions;
  • Three new Wild and Scenic River (WSR) designations and three new WSR studies that are expected to become new designations; and
  • Land entitlement for Sealaska, an Alaska Native Regional Corporation

Critics consider those provisions pork because they have nothing to do with defense or national security. The NDAA provides guidance for U.S. defense spending and policy. It is considered a “must-pass” legislation.

The public land provisions are included the text of the NDAA for fiscal 2015 under “TITLE XXX—NATURAL RESOURCES RELATED GENERAL PROVISIONS.”

Back to the military:

“Harry Reid screwed this up all year long and President Obama and now Republicans are going along with the screwing of the military. I do not know why we bother to win elections when we turn around and screw the people we campaign on,” conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt said on his show last night after an interview with Republican Senator Jim Inhofe.

Yesterday the lame-duck Senate released its detailed plan for the National Defense Authorization Act. The legislation cuts the pay raise for the military, imposes caps on basic housing allowance and imposes co-pays on prescription drugs totaling $5 billion in overall cuts.

All of the pay and benefits trims were backed by the Pentagon and White House in an effort to slow the growth of personnel costs. The housing cuts and pharmacy co-pays were the final sticking points for lawmakers, with a compromise reached after nearly a month of behind-the-scenes fights.When asked to explain the reasoning behind the cuts, especially when the federal government funds so much nonsense, the best Inhofe could come up with in the interview was, “We need a bill.” Inhofe sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee 

Keep reading

Military response team getting prepared for U.S. civil Ebola UPDATE

UPDATE: Of course you do have the authority. I am just being silly. Funny that you should raise te question. Did you ask Eric?

“We actually do have the legal authorities to do this,” a Pentagon spokesman said on Monday, one day after U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered the U.S. military to form an “expeditionary Ebola support team.”

“This isn’t going to violate Posse Comitatus,” Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 says the Army (and later, the Air Force) may not be used to “execute the laws” of the United States.

“This is nothing more than potential support, and I stress ‘potential support,’ to civilian medical authorities — if and only if they ask for that,” Kirby said. “But there’s no violation of posse comitatus. The Northern Command commander has the authorities that he needs to get this team ready to go.” More at  CNS

Why a military response team? Why the Department of Defense? I guess we know the answer. No tin foil required. Answer is given in  the post,”What is the purpose of FEMA camps?”which follows. Martial law already commenced.

 Martial Law declared in Connecticut over Ebola, Civil Rights suspended indefintely

 Washington Examiner:

An United States-based emergency Ebola response team is being prepped, the Department of Defense said Sunday.

In response to a request by the Department of Health and Human Services, a 30-person team will be ready to “response quickly, effectively, and safely” should more Ebola cases arise inside the U.S., according to a Pentagon press release.

“Secretary [Chuck] Hagel today ordered his Northern Command Commander, Gen. Chuck Jacoby, to prepare and train a 30-person expeditionary medical support team that could, if required, provide short-notice assistance to civilian medical professionals in the United States,” Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby said in statement.

The team of 20 critical care nurses, five doctors trained in infectious disease and five trainers in infectious disease protocols will be sent to Fort Sam Houston in Texas for up to seven days of training provided by the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases.

Once training is completed, the team will remain in a “prepare to deploy” status for up to 30 days, according to the Defense Department.

The team will not be sent to West Africa or elsewhere overseas, as it is meant only to deal with domestic Ebola-related issues.

I encourage everyone to look at the Heritage Foundation link regarding Model State Emergency Health Powers Act.. The Heritage link is not from the tin foil crowd as well. Here we go:

“Quarantine is used to separate and restrict the movement of well persons who may have been exposed to a communicable disease to see if they become ill. These people may have been exposed to a disease and do not know it, or they may have the disease but do not show symptoms,” states the CDC.

Quarantine can also help limit the spread of communicable disease. More at Heritage Foundation

Just what is the purpose of FEMA camps?

Internment Camp Services Bid Arrives After NDAA

KBR’s call for FEMA camp service bids arrives soon after the Senate overwhelmingly passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which permits the military to detain and interrogate supposed domestic terror suspects in violation of the Fourth Amendment and Posse Comitatus.

Section 1031 of the NDAA bill declares the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allows American citizens to be arrested on U.S. soil and incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay.

A number of civil liberties groups have come out in strong opposition to the legislation, most notably the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), the nation’s oldest and largest Asian American civil and human rights organization.

In a letter addressed to Congress, S. Floyd Mori, the national director of JACL, said the NDAA is the first time that Congress has scaled back on the protections provided by the Non-Detention Act of 1971. Mori said the legislation, if enacted and put into use, would be reminiscent of the unconstitutional indefinite detention of Japanese Americans during World War II.

National Emergency Centers Act

In 2009, the National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 was introduced in Congress. It mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill.

In addition to emergencies, the legislation is designed to “meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security,” an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse, as Paul Joseph Watson noted in January of 2009. Full Story at Prison PLanet

“As always, their safety and security will remain foremost on his mind,” Kirby said of Hagel.

Martial Law declared in Connecticut over Ebola, Civil Rights suspended indefintely

UPDATE: Just posted: Martial law in NE PA remains over Cop Killer Frein, call it what you like October 21, 2014. This is just the dry run. Back to the post:

We knew this was coming. Those of us with the Tin Foil Hats. We warned what was ahead. Isn’t it interesting that Connecticut, a State that has not one case of Ebola is the first State out of the gate? Zero Hedge does a good analysis of the particulars, but most of us already have the drift.

Governor Dan Malloy has declared a Public Health Emergency in Connecticut, authorizing the “isolation of any individual reasonably believed to have been exposed to the Ebola virus.” Simply put, as we noted previously, the State of Public Health Emergency allows bureaucrats to detain and force-vaccinate people without due process – despite not one single case being found in CT.If there is a major Ebola pandemic in America, all of the liberties and the freedoms that you currently enjoy would be gone.

 

State of Emergency20141010_CT1_0

 

Translated… as previously noted:

If there is a major Ebola pandemic in America, all of the liberties and the freedoms that you currently enjoy would be gone.  If government officials believe that you have the virus, federal law allows them to round you up and detain you “for such time and in such manner as may be reasonably necessary.”  In addition, the CDC already has the authority to quarantine healthy Americans if they reasonably believe that they may become sick.  During an outbreak, the government can force you to remain isolated in your own home, or the government may forcibly take you to a treatment facility, a tent city, a sports stadium, an old military base or a camp.  You would not have any choice in the matter.  And you would be forced to endure any medical procedure mandated by the government.  That includes shots, vaccines and the drawing of blood.  During such a scenario, you can scream about your “rights” all that you want, but it won’t do any good.

In case you are tempted to think that I am making this up, I want you to read what federal law actually says.  The following is 42 U.S.C. 264(d).  I have added bold for emphasis…

(1) Regulations prescribed under this section may provide for the apprehension and examination of any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage and (A) to be moving or about to move from a State to another State; or (B) to be a probable source of infection to individuals who, while infected with such disease in a qualifying stage, will be moving from a State to another State. Such regulations may provide that if upon examination any such individual is found to be infected, he may be detained for such time and in such manner as may be reasonably necessary. For purposes of this subsection, the term “State” includes, in addition to the several States, only the District of Columbia.

 

(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term “qualifying stage”, with respect to a communicable disease, means that such disease—

 

(A) is in a communicable stage; or

 

(B) is in a precommunicable stage, if the disease would be likely to cause a public health emergency if transmitted to other individuals.

H/T and read more at :Zero Hedge

Recall  Obama: ‘Prolonged Detention’ otherwise known as FEMA Camps? I am no fan of Rachel Maddow, but she gave a hint of what was to happen in the clip at the above link in the post done 

We have seen our president issue executive orders within the last 12 months, in case of a National Security Emergency, to take control of all communications (including cell phones and internet) and all sources of utilities/energy (including gasoline, water, and electricity). We hear of FEMA camps and continually hear leaked news from DHS inside sources who claim that Martial Law is coming soon. Most recently the plans for drone attacks against American Citizens, on U.S. soil, has been leaked. There is no doubt that these are dangerous times. Secrets of the Fed

Would you believe Obama’s explanation?

Obama plans on deploying the military in USA in cases of flu

So one can laugh at this and claim it is the tin foil hat brigade at it again. The other possibility is to read the original documents and shiver at the thought of what this regime claims as its authority.

It’s bad enough that the federal government is building up weaponry, ammunition and SWAT teams, it also has a plan to deploy soldiers in the case of a major flu outbreak.

The flu?

That’s right, reported Cheryl Chumley, the author of the new “Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare is Becoming Our Reality.”

She pointed to a page posted online by the Defense Department that outlines the federal government’s options in case of a flu outbreak.

Question: What is DoD’s role if there were a pandemic influenza outbreak within the United States?

“Military assistance for civil disturbances” is among that “tasks” the Defense Department would perform “in a pandemic influenza outbreak within the U.S.”

Other tasks include “quarantine assistant to civil authorities,” “mortuary affairs,” “continuity of operations/government,” “protect defense critical infrastructure,” “biosurveillance, disease detection, and information sharing,” and “medical intelligence.”

“The idea of our nation’s fighting forces coming into our communities and kicking off biosurveillance missions, dressed in full battle gear, is something right out of a science fiction drama,” said Chumley.

“It’s bad enough we learn that a 2010 Pentagon memo allows the president to dispatch unarmed drones over American skies and order soldiers to dispel civil uprisings, under certain circumstances. But unleashing the military for a flu epidemic?”
Read more at WND

If this is not enough, check out

Supreme Court allows NDAA ‘Indefinite detention’ of Americans to stand May 1, 2014

From  August, 2012 post:  Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens: Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted …the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

You might want to check out FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

Supreme Court allows NDAA ‘Indefinite detention’ of Americans to stand

The Supreme Court this week, refused to hear an Appeals court decision regarding the NDAA “indefinite detention”. This leaves Obama with the power to pack us up. While we are looking the other way. This should be the headline story today. But then again, we have the Basketball owner’s racism that is much more important. First a refresher.  From  August, 2012 post:  Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens: Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted …the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

You might want to check out FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

Now back to the update:

A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court means the federal government now has an open door to “detain as a threat to national security anyone viewed as a troublemaker,” according to critics.

The high court this week refused to review an appeals court decision that said the president and U.S. military can arrest and indefinitely detain individuals.

The controversial provision authorizes the military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap, detain without trial and hold indefinitely American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.”

At the trial court, on Sept. 12, 2012, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District Court of New York ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and placed a permanent injunction on the indefinite detention provision.

Obama then appealed, and the 2nd Circuit authorized the government detention program.

Since the law passed, multiple states have passed laws banning its enforcement. Herb Titus, a constitutional expert, previously told WND Forrest’s ruling underscored “the arrogance of the current regime, in that they will not answer questions that they ought to answer to a judge because they don’t think they have to.”

The judge explained that the plaintiffs alleged paragraph 1021 is “constitutionally infirm, violating both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the 1st Amendment as well due process rights guaranteed by the 5th Amendment.”

From: Supreme Court green lights detention of Americans  Read more at WND

NDAA Passes Senate – Welcome to the Gulag or what they won’t tell you

Looks like this is the vote breakdown U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes. 84 to 15 with 1 not voting. Brave guy.

YEAs 84
NAYs 15
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Question:              On the Motion (Motion to Concur in the House Amendment to Senate Amendment to H.R. 3304 )
Vote Number: 284 Vote Date: December 19, 2013,  11:14 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Motion Agreed to
Measure Number: H.R. 3304

Congratulations America. We are now a totalitarian State. I know I have been beating on this bill, but just to let you know what you bought. Enjoy the Gulag. I will post the vote tally when available. You thought last year’s was bad? This is even worse. See Details Here

Even more onerous than the previous versions. It must be voted on by the House and by the Senate .Section 1071 of the version of the 2014 NDAA approved by the House and Senate committees this week expands on the scope of surveillance established by the Patriot Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF).

From  August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted “…the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

You might want to check out FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

So not only did Obama’s attorney lie about his Marxist boss’s corrupt intentions;he actually claimed that the abuse of American citizens was somehow acceptable because those unconstitutionally imprisoned might ask that the charges against them be produced after ONLY a few years behind bars!

Script from Video: Senator Levin told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Specifically, the section that Obama asked to be reworded was Section 1031 of the NDAA FY2012, which says that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” could be held indefinitely.

“It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee…we removed it at the request of the administration,” said Levin. “It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language the absence of which is now objected to.”

Here we have Rand Paul telling what it will take to get on “The List” of being a terrorist.

Defense One
  1. DefenseNews.com ‎- 2 hours ago
    In a vote that ended around 11:40 p.m. Thursday, the chamber voted 84-15 to pass the 2014 national defense authorization act (NDAA),

The defense policy bill is “one of the essential pieces of legislation the Senate considers every year,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said this week. The NDAA “is legislation that … puts muscle behind America’s most important strategic objectives around the globe.”

Levin said “the bill before us is not a Democratic bill and it is not a Republican bill. It is a bipartisan, bicameral defense bill.”

NDAA 2014 – Congress rushing to approve even worse Defense bill UPDATE

Latest Update:

News for ndaa passed

Defense One
  1. DefenseNews.com ‎- 2 hours ago
    In a vote that ended around 11:40 p.m. Thursday, the chamber voted 84-15 to pass the 2014 national defense authorization act (NDAA), which….

UPDATE: Just passed cloture 71 to 29.Will be voted on today or tomorrow.

While we were looking the other way, the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act  2014) rises. Even more onerous than the previous versions. It must be voted on by the House and by the Senate next week. Will they do it? Of course they will.

Section 1071 of the version of the 2014 NDAA approved by the House and Senate committees this week expands on the scope of surveillance established by the Patriot Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF).

The House and Senate Armed Services Committees have reached an agreement on the fiscal year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

As approved by the committees, the text of the latest iteration of the bill is derived from H.R. 1960, which passed the House on June 14 by a vote of 315-108 and S. 1197, a version passed by a Senate committee by a vote of 23-3, later that same day.

House and Senate leaders hurried to hammer out a mutually acceptable measure so as to get the whole package passed before the end of the year.

For two years, the NDAA included provisions that purported to authorize the president of the United States to deploy the U.S. military to apprehend and indefinitely detain any person (including an American citizen) who he believes “represent[s] an enduring security threat to the United States.”

Such an immense grant of power is not only unconscionable, but unconstitutional, as well.

Finally, there is in the NDAA for 2014 a frightening fusion of the federal government’s constant surveillance of innocent Americans and the assistance it will give to justifying the indefinite detention of anyone labeled an enemy of the regime.

Section 1071(a) authorizes the secretary of defense to “establish a center to be known as the ‘Conflict Records Research Center.’” According to the text of the latest version of the NDAA, the center’s task would be to compile a “digital research database including translations and to facilitate research and analysis of records captured from countries, organizations, and individuals, now or once hostile to the United States.”

In order to accomplish the center’s purpose, the secretary of defense will create an information exchange in cooperation with the director of national intelligence.

Key to the functioning of this information exchange will be the collection of “captured records.” Section 1071(g)(1), defines a captured record as “a document, audio file, video file, or other material captured during combat operations from countries, organizations, or individuals, now or once hostile to the United States.”

When read in conjunction with the provision of the AUMF that left the War on Terror open-ended and the prior NDAAs’ classification of the United States as a battleground in that unconstitutional war, and you’ve got a powerful combination that can knock out the entire Bill of Rights.

Finally, when all the foregoing is couched within the context of the revelations regarding the dragnet surveillance programs of the NSA, it becomes evident that anyone’s phone records, e-mail messages, browsing history, text messages, and social media posts could qualify as a “captured record.”

After being seized by the NSA (or some other federal surveillance apparatus), the materials would be processed by the Conflict Records Research Center created by this bill. This center’s massive database of electronic information and its collaboration with the NSA converts the United States into a constantly monitored holding cell and all its citizens and residents into suspects. All, of course, in the name of the security of the homeland.

Although the outlook is dire, there are those willing to stand and oppose the threats to liberty posed by the NDAA.

In The Federalist, no. 46, Madison recommended that an effective way to thwart federal overreach is for agents of the states to refuse “to cooperate with officers of the Union.”

In order for Fiscal Year 2014 NDAA to become the “law,” the House of Representatives must pass the bill this week and the Senate would have to follow suit by the end of next week. This gives Americans only a few short days to contact their federal representatives and senators and encourage them to reject any version of the NDAA that infringes on the timeless civil liberties protected by the Constitution. Read more  The New American

Need a refresher?

From  August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

…Yet incredibly, when pressed on the issue, this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would, after all, have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,.right”?

The group points out that the new Second Circuit ruling is completely incorrect because it claims that Section 1021 of the 2012 NDAA says nothing about the government’s ability to detain citizens.

You might want to check out first FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Chief Mark Kessler “Live Free or Die”

If you are feeling anyway like me, this little rant by the Chief will give expression to our frustration. Now they want our passwords?  The Drudge Headline:

FEDS DEMAND WEB FIRMS TURN OVER PASSWORDS

They vote down the NDAA mass collection of records? Well, the Chief has something to say if they want to come for our guns.

Warning, rough language!

NEED I SAY MORE 🙂
LIVE FREE OR DIE !
http://www.chiefkessler.com
anyone looking to donate towards a new police vehicle for Gilberton Borough Police department can do so by clicking on the link below
http://www.gofundme.com/Gilberton-Pol…

Chief Mark Kessler, Kerry & UN , can SUCK IT

%d bloggers like this: