[CitizensTruth] ARTICLE-Two Acts of Tyranny - Part I

[Walterb306 at cs.com]

All,

Fyi,

Beverley

TWO 'ACTS' OF TYRANNY ON THE SAME DAY! 

By Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D. 
December 7, 2006 
Updated June 2, 2007 
On October 17, 2006, 'a date which will live in infamy' . . . there were two 
acts of tyranny committed.  The first was a public signing of the 'Military 
Commissions Act of 2006' which suspended habeas corpus allowing the president to 
declare you an 'enemy combatant' and end your rights to seek legal or 
judicial relief from unlawful imprisonment. 

The second act of tyranny took place in a private Oval Office ceremony, in 
which the president signed into law the 'John Warner National Defense 
Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007' which essentially eliminates the protections of the 
Posse Comitatus Act and re-wrote the Insurrection Act.  The NDAA will allow the 
president to declare a 'public emergency' and take control of state-based 
National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in 
order to 'suppress public disorder'! 

About The Military Commissions Act of 2006 . . . 

"A writ of habeas corpus which is Latin for 'you have the body' [as proof] is 
a judicial mandate to a prison official ordering that an inmate be brought to 
the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned 
lawfully and whether or not he should be released from custody."(1) 

"The writ of habeas corpus serves as an important check on the manner in 
which state courts pay respect to federal constitutional rights.  The writ is 'the 
fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary 
and lawless state action'."(1) 


The Signing of the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006 
Expressing the pessimist's view was law professor Jonathan Turley who wrote: 
"The Congress just gave the president despotic powers and you could hear a 
yawn across the country [. . . ]  People clearly don't realize what a fundamental 
change it is about who we are as a country.  What happened today changed us. 
 And I'm not too sure we're going to change back anytime soon."(2) 

Turley also said that:  "What, really, a time of shame this is for the 
American system.  What the Congress did and what the president signed today 
essentially revokes over 200 years of American principles and values."(3) 

You can watch this MSNBC video where Keith Olbermann and guest Jonathon 
Turley, Constitutional Law professor at George Washington University discuss the 
Military Commissions Act here. 

About the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007 . . . 

The NDAA essentially eliminated the Posse Comitatus Act and re-wrote the 
Insurrection Act so that the president can declare a 'public emergency' and take 
control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor 
or local authorities, in order to 'suppress public disorder'! 

"The historic and ominous re-writing of the Insurrection Act, accomplished in 
the dead of night, which gives Bush the legal authority to declare martial 
law, is now an accomplished fact."(4) 

"In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, 
according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the 
President to declare federal martial law .  It does so by revising the 
Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President’s ability to deploy troops 
within the United States.  The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has 
historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce 
strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement.  With 
one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions."(4) 

The Signing of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 
2007 
What 'Rights' Have Been Taken From You? 

"On September 28, by a vote of 65-34, the Senate formally passed S. 3930, the 
Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA).  The next day, the House of 
Representatives followed suit, passing the act by a vote of 250-170, . . . [whereby] 
"alien unlawful enemy combatants ... [to be] subject to trial by military 
commissions" without the constitutional safeguards American citizens possess against 
illegal detainment and judicial railroading."(5) 

As far as an American citizen is concerned the definition of the term 
'unlawful enemy combatant' has ominous import for them.  The law states the 
following: 

"(1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT - (A) The term 'unlawful enemy combatant' 
means--"(6) 
"(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and 
materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents 
who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the 
Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or "(6) 

"(ii) a person who , before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the 
Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy 
combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal 
established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense 
."(6) 
"Notice that this definition contains no exception for Americans; it throws 
the blanket over citizen and alien alike by using the word 'person' rather than 
'alien'."(5) 

All Americans should know that the suspension of the 'writ of habeas corpus' 
by the 'Military Commissions Act of 2006' is a violation of Article 1, Section 
9 of the U. S.Constitution which states:  "The privilege of the writ of 
habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion 
the public safety may require it." 

Gonzales:  ‘There Is No Express Grant of Habeas Corpus In The Constitution’ 



Yesterday, [1/18/07] during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Attorney 
General Alberto Gonzales . . . was debating Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) about 
whether the Supreme Court’s ruling on Guantanamo detainees last year cited the 
constitutional right to habeas corpus.  Gonzales claimed the Court did not cite 
such a right, [Specter disagreed] then [Gonzales] added, "There is no express 
grant of habeas in the Constitution." 

Specter pushed back.  "Wait a minute.  The constitution says you can’t take 
it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion.  Doesn’t that mean you 
have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?" 

You MUST watch this EXTREMELY DISTURBING video: 
 http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/videos/GonzalesOnHabeas.html#Title 

Ominously, the full text of the 'Military Commissions Act of 2006' was 
published by the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations).  The fact that the CFR 
published the 'Act' would appear to be prima facie evidence of the Shadow Government's 
support for its genesis!(6) 

The Center for Constitutional Rights commented that the:  "Congress is now 
rubber-stamping a bill that was written by the President which gives the 
President expansive power to detain without judicial oversight.  If the Military 
Commissions Act is passed, it will grant the President the privilege of kings , 
allowing him to imprison any critics as alleged ‘enemy combatants,’ never to 
see the inside of a court room or to have the chance to challenge their 
detention or their treatment.  What would we say if another country passed a law 
making it legal to snatch U.S. citizens and detain them indefinitely?"(7) 

Sadly, the American Forces Press Service, propagandized the signing by 
utilizing the most common form of deception . . . omission.  Read how they announced 
the signing but uttered not one peep about the potentially devastating future 
it has unleashed.(8) 



The Signing of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 
2007 
What 'Rights' Have Been Taken From You? 

"On September 28, by a vote of 65-34, the Senate formally passed S. 3930, the 
Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA).  The next day, the House of 
Representatives followed suit, passing the act by a vote of 250-170, . . . [whereby] 
"alien unlawful enemy combatants ... [to be] subject to trial by military 
commissions" without the constitutional safeguards American citizens possess against 
illegal detainment and judicial railroading."(5) 

As far as an American citizen is concerned the definition of the term 
'unlawful enemy combatant' has ominous import for them.  The law states the 
following: 

"(1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT - (A) The term 'unlawful enemy combatant' 
means--"(6) 
"(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and 
materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents 
who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the 
Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or "(6) 

"(ii) a person who , before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the 
Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy 
combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal 
established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense 
."(6) 
"Notice that this definition contains no exception for Americans; it throws 
the blanket over citizen and alien alike by using the word 'person' rather than 
'alien'."(5) 

All Americans should know that the suspension of the 'writ of habeas corpus' 
by the 'Military Commissions Act of 2006' is a violation of Article 1, Section 
9 of the U. S.Constitution which states:  "The privilege of the writ of 
habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion 
the public safety may require it." 

Gonzales:  ‘There Is No Express Grant of Habeas Corpus In The Constitution’ 



Yesterday, [1/18/07] during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Attorney 
General Alberto Gonzales . . . was debating Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) about 
whether the Supreme Court’s ruling on Guantanamo detainees last year cited the 
constitutional right to habeas corpus.  Gonzales claimed the Court did not cite 
such a right, [Specter disagreed] then [Gonzales] added, "There is no express 
grant of habeas in the Constitution." 

Specter pushed back.  "Wait a minute.  The constitution says you can’t take 
it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion.  Doesn’t that mean you 
have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?" 

You MUST watch this EXTREMELY DISTURBING video: 
 http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/videos/GonzalesOnHabeas.html#Title 

Ominously, the full text of the 'Military Commissions Act of 2006' was 
published by the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations).  The fact that the CFR 
published the 'Act' would appear to be prima facie evidence of the Shadow Government's 
support for its genesis!(6) 

The Center for Constitutional Rights commented that the:  "Congress is now 
rubber-stamping a bill that was written by the President which gives the 
President expansive power to detain without judicial oversight.  If the Military 
Commissions Act is passed, it will grant the President the privilege of kings , 
allowing him to imprison any critics as alleged ‘enemy combatants,’ never to 
see the inside of a court room or to have the chance to challenge their 
detention or their treatment.  What would we say if another country passed a law 
making it legal to snatch U.S. citizens and detain them indefinitely?"(7) 

Sadly, the American Forces Press Service, propagandized the signing by 
utilizing the most common form of deception . . . omission.  Read how they announced 
the signing but uttered not one peep about the potentially devastating future 
it has unleashed.(8) 


                            Senator John Warner 

Martial Law Now Stalks America . . . 

On October 17, 2006, "Public Law 109-364, or the 'John Warner National 
Defense Authorization Act of 2007' (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander 
in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the 
President to declare a 'public emergency' and station troops anywhere in 
America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent 
of the governor or local authorities, in order to 'suppress public 
disorder'."(5) 

What the National Defense Authorization Act does is end the Posse Comitatus 
Act of 1787.  Posse Comitatus is Latin for 'power of the country.'  It WAS a 
"law, [that] was championed by far-sighted Southern lawmakers in 1878.  They had 
experienced a fifteen year military occupation by the US Army in post-Civil 
War law enforcement.  They understood the heel of a jackboot."(9) 

"In a nutshell, this act bans the Army, Navy, Airforce and Marines from 
participating in arrest, searches, seizure of evidence and other police-type 
activity on U.S. soil.  The Coast Guard and National Guard troops under the control 
of state governors are excluded from the act."(9) 

All these new tyrannical laws have been created obsessively to combat the 
amorphous concept of 'fighting terrorism' . . . an undefined and ever present 
boogey man.  So not only is the military now permitted to be used around the 
country, the president can take over the National Guard and the Coast Guard too. 
 It can happen under ANY pretext, at which time the president will become the 
dictator-in-chief. 

According to Gen. Tommy Franks, martial law will replace the Constitution 
after the next terror attack .  In an interview with Cigar Aficionado he said: 
 "It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, 
massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the 
United States of America – that causes our population to question our own 
Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of 
another mass, casualty-producing event.  Which in fact, then begins to unravel 
the fabric of our Constitution.  Two steps, very, very important."(10) 

Written Dissent to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007: 

No matter your opinion of Cynthia McKinney, her 26 page dissent of the NDAA 
of 2007 is very compelling and highlights the damage and erosion, of tasks and 
performance, taking place between the police and the military in direct 
contradiction of our Constitution.  The following excerpt is from the section 
concerning the issue of Posse Comitatus [pp. 30-31 .pdf (pp. 528-529)] which can be 
found here:  (11) 

This Authorization should also have reaffirmed the principle of Posse 
Comitatus for military forces, police and contracted security or combat forces.  This 
Constitutional principle creates a bright line between military and police 
functions. 

In the wake of the attacks on September 11, 2001, the Bush administration has 
continued to make widespread and unnecessary changes in laws and 
administrative powers that undermine the most basic Constitutional principles and 
protected rights of citizens in a democracy [ours is a Constitutional Republic]. 

Recently, both President Bush and Senator Mark Warner (VA) have renewed calls 
to undermine or reverse the Posse Comitatus Act of 1867 [sic - i.e.,1878], 
which re-established the Constitutional principle and practice of separating 
military and police functions in a democracy [ours is a Constitutional Republic]. 

The experience of the founding fathers with the British model that combined 
the functions was enough to cause them to set that division sharply in 
administrative powers and civilian command of the military. 

The principles began to be eroded in the period following the end of the 
Civil War, and the effective occupation of areas of the south by federal troops 
who were holding military tribunals, carrying out executions of citizens and 
usurping local police and judicial control.  Their excesses came to the attention 
of the post-war Congress and they passed the Posse Comitatus Act to forbid 
the military being used to enforce laws. 

Further erosion followed the end of the Vietnam War, when police departments 
were increasingly militarized in training and equipment as well as employing a 
large number of returning war veterans. SWAT teams were created, a clearly 
militarized police function, getting training on military bases with advanced 
weapons. 

When President George H.W. Bush came into office in the 1980s, his programs 
made increased use of military troops and equipment in the war against drugs, 
supporting police and collecting intelligence in regard to civilian crimes. 
 Joint Military Task Forces were created that combined DoD, FBI, SWAT, ATF and 
local police in sieges at Wounded Knee, Waco, Texas and against MOVE in 
Philadelphia, using tanks and military explosives.:, 

President Bush has ample authority under provisions of existing laws on 
disaster response to mobilize and command any and all federal assets, including 
military forces. State directed National Guard units have always worked in 
conjunction with federal troops without being put under federal control themselves . 
 Both National Guard and regular military forces are authorized under federal 
and state laws to use force to protect lives, property and public safety 
during a declared emergency.  Police functions have been wisely left to local 
police and state National Guard forces, except when the situation was so dire they 
could not function. 


Executive Orders and PDDs Say How They Will Do It! 

Once martial law is invoked, then the Executive Orders (EOs) concerned with 
national security or defense issues are then ALSO invoked.  These were 
previously known as National Security Directives.  Under the Clinton Administration, 
they were renamed 'Presidential Decision Directives', commonly known as PDDs. 

For example PDD 63, issued in 1998 that speaks to protecting America's 
critical infrastructure "including telecommunications, banking and finance, energy, 
and transportation-that supports the U.S. economy, government, and 
military."(12) 

"The aim of PDD 63 was to introduce an improved information system 
infrastructure that is secure and interconnected by the year 2003, and to significantly 
increase security to government systems by the year 2000.  PDD 63 designed a 
new configuration to protect the country's critical infrastructure.  Some of 
the components are as follows: 
A national coordinator to handle critical infrastructure, as well as foreign 
terrorism and domestic mass destruction; 
The National Infrastructure Protection Center at the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation to bring together representatives from various agencies for 
information sharing and collaboration; 
Information Sharing and Analysis Center to be set up by the private sector in 
cooperation with the government; 
A National Infrastructure Assurance Council made up of private sector leaders 
and state/local officials to provide advice for a national plan; . . ." 
Why and who will be those from the 'private sector' running our government in 
a time of crisis?  Will it be those international bankers and industrialists? 
 It gives no parameters.  It is concerning that they could ALL be the very 
people who want a One World Monopoly and the creation of the North American 
Union.  What better, quick and efficient way to enforce their plans than to have 
them spring forward using a domestic tragedy like 9/11?  But then that has 
always been their game plan. 

Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, 
acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. 
 Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials 
in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies.  However, 
in many instances they have been used to guide agencies in directions contrary 
to congressional intent. 

Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but 
they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress .  The President's 
source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, 
Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive 
Power." 

Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the 
Laws be faithfully executed."  To implement or execute the laws of the land, 
Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and 
departments, often in the form of Executive Orders." 

But Today's Executive Orders Go FAR Beyond Those Rules As These Quotes Attest 
. . . 

"Stroke of the pen. Law of the Land.  Kinda cool."
Paul Begala, former Clinton advisor, The New York Times, July 5, 1998 (13) 

"We've switched the rules of the game.  We're not trying to do anything 
legislatively."
Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, The Washington Times, June 14, 1999 (13) 

Read over the following Executive Orders so you can understand what TOTAL, 
COMPLETE, and DICTATORIAL POWER these orders will invoke.  Go here to search for 
the actual text for the Executive Orders as well at the current disposition 
of those Executive Orders:  (14) 

Go to that Federal Register and check out the following Executive Orders: 
13010, 13130, 13228, 13231, 13234, 14284, 13284, 13286 (transfers control of 
12919 to DHS). 

Pay Particular Attention to Executive Order 12919 . . . 

The president of the United States, with the help of federal agencies, will 
have control over the following, as annotated by Paula Demers in 1996:  (15) 

(a) All transportation, "regardless of ownership."  This means that if they 
need your car, they’ve got it.  They will control all public transportation 
also. 

(b) All forms of energy, including "petroleum, gas (natural and manufactured) 
, electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal), atomic energy, and 
the production, conservation, use, control, and distribution (including 
pipelines)."  This means the federal government will have complete control over who 
will have power (electricity, etc.) and who won’t.  They will be able to "pull 
the plug" on us at their discretion. 

(c) All farm equipment .  Farmers will not have to be part of "the production 
or preparation for market use of food resources."  They did this in Russia. 
 The farmers worked for the government. 

(d) All fertilizer .  This means that any product, or combination of products 
that contain one or more of the elements--nitrogen, phosphorus and 
potassium--will be able to be confiscated by the government.  The reason they have this 
combination is because it includes anything that can be used as a plant 
nutrient.  If you want a garden, forget it. 

(e) All food resources .  ALL means ALL.  This includes all "commodities and 
products, simple, mixed, or compound, or complements to such commodities or 
products that are being ingested by either human beings or animals...."  This 
includes all "starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, 
cotton, tobacco, wool mohair, hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores."  That means 
they can come into your house and take all your food.  Period.  Catherine 
Bertini, the executive director "UN World Food Program" made an interesting comment 
in Beijng, China, at the UN 4th World Conference on Women in September, 1995. 
 She said, "Food is power.  We use it to change behavior.  Some may call that 
bribery.  We do not apologize."  [Henry Kissinger has infamously said:  'Food 
can be used as a weapon!'] 

(f) All food resource facilities .  This means "plants, machinery, vehicles 
(including on farm), and other facilities required for production, processing, 
distribution and storage (including cold food storage)."  They go on to say 
that it includes "livestock and poultry feed and seed."  In other words, they 
will control anything that has to do with food. 

(j) All health resources .  This means EVERYTHING.  They will have control 
over all "materials, facilities, health supplies, and equipment (including 
pharmaceutical, blood collecting and dispensing supplies, biological, surgical 
textiles, and emergency surgical instruments and supplies)."  They will be able to 
come into your home and take your medicines. 

(k) All metals and minerals.  [Think gold and silver confiscation] 

(m) All water resources .  ALL usable water from all of the sources within 
the jurisdiction of the United States.  All the water that can be "managed, 
controlled and allocated to meet emergency requirements."  Not only will they be 
able to turn off your water supply, they can come and take any water you have 
stored in your house. 
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/citizenstruth/attachments/20080919/756ec6a7/attachment-0001.html>