December 25th, 2011

Oath Keepers Launches National Effort to Recall and/or Remove Members of Congress Who Voted for NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, U.S. Congress!


There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights.”- Marine General Smedley Butler.

Oath Keepers has launched a national effort to recall (or remove by any other lawful means) all of the oath breaking members of Congress, in both the House and Senate, who voted for the National Defense Appropriations Act of 2012 (NDAA), which contains provisions that authorize indefinite military detention and trial by military commission of “any person” – including U.S. citizens and lawful residents – upon the mere say-so of the President or one of his subordinates in the Executive Branch, such as within the Department of Defense or CIA.

Number three on the Oath Keepers list of Orders We Will Not Obey states:

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.

That is near the top of our list for very good reason – this claimed power will kill our Bill of Rights unless it is stopped.  To be blunt, we consider the NDAA of 2012 to be a declaration of war on the American people, and an act of treason.   But even if you disagree with that view, and merely consider those who voted for it to be oath breakers, please work hard to remove them all from office.  Oath Keepers members across the nation will lead or assist efforts in their states to remove any member of Congress, regardless of party, who voted for this monstrosity.

We encourage all Americans of whatever political party to set aside their differences and come together in defense of our Bill of Rights by rooting out this den of vipers in Washington D.C. who are either knowingly killing our Bill of Rights, were too concerned with their careers to take a principled stand by voting against the NDAA, or are useful idiots who don’t understand what they swore an oath to defend.  Whatever their excuse, they have violated their oaths to defend the Constitution and must be sent packing.  This is not about politics.  This is about defending the Constitution.  As Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes put it:

These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution.  It’s not about the left or right, it’s about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America.  It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization.

As two time Medal of Honor winner Marine General Smedley Butler once said “There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights.”   Time to fight.

This is a bi-partisan assault on the Bill of Rights that will require a bi-partisan defense.  We the People must adopt a scorched-earth policy against all who voted for the NDAA of 2012, regardless of party, using any and all lawful means available to remove them from office.  If you can remove them by means of recall, then do so.  If that option is not available in your state, consider working to make it an option in your state.  If attempts to recall are stopped by the courts, then root the oath breakers out in the next primary of whatever party they are in, making this issue the litmus test and supporting a challenger who will pledge to repeal this dangerous law.   Make this desecration of our Bill of Rights campaign issue number one.

And if you don’t manage to root them out in the primary, then defeat them in the general election, again supporting a challenger who pledges to repeal the detention provisions of the NDAA.   Use whatever lawful means or combination of strategies available to get the job done.   And even when any particular method “fails,” it still succeeds in keeping the focus on this act of betrayal, and it serves to educate the American people, waking them up to the ongoing bipartisan assault on our Bill of Rights.  Even if we lose a battle we can still win the war.

We must keep this issue in the public eye, and keep the pressure on.  Just as Jefferson and Madison were successful in rallying opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, which clearly violated the Constitution, and used that opposition to sweep the Federalists from Congress in what was known as “the revolution of 1800,” we must rally opposition to this clearly unconstitutional act and use it to sweep all of the Bill of Rights killing career politicians, of both major parties, out of Congress.   Clean them all out!

To kick off this national campaign, Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes, along with Montana artist William Crain, will be personally spear-heading a recall effort in Montana, aimed at all three of Montana’s federal delegation -  Senators Jon Tester and Max Baucus, and Representative Denny Rehberg – since they all voted for the NDAA.  Stewart said:

Here in Montana, while we will go after all three violators of the Bill of Rights, I will place special emphasis and “focus of effort” on Denny Rehberg, since he is so fond of wrapping himself in the flag and claiming to be defending the Constitution while his votes do the exact opposite.   In that sense, Rehberg is much like John McCain and Lindsey Graham, two Republicans who, right along with Carl Levin and Joseph Lieberman, are leading a sustained and relentless assault on our Bill of Rights,  transforming America in to the Fourth Reich in the name of “national security” while claiming to be defenders of the Constitution.   There is surely a special place in Hell reserved for such hypocrites.  The blood of America’s war dead cries out for the Bill of Rights to be defended against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and we will answer that call.

My only question for Denny Rehberg is if he is a knowing traitor to our Constitution, like John McCain and Lindsey Graham (both of whom served in the military and clearly know exactly what they are doing), or is Rehberg just a useful idiot?   Regardless of the answer, he is unfit to be dog-catcher and I will make it my mission in Montana to ensure that this oath breaker never serves in public office again.

And as for Senator Jon Tester, Stewart Rhodes had this to say, directly addressed to the Senator:

Senator Tester, my friend Jim Manley introduced us back in 2006, at Doug Wold’s place in Polson during the Montana Trial Lawyers Convention, when you were running for U.S. Senate against Conrad Burns.  Jim assured me that you would fight against the neocons who were assaulting the Bill of Rights, and when I met you, I looked you in the eye and asked if you would fight to stop them, and you answered “yes.”  And so I was very happy to see you defeat the oath breaking Conrad Burns.  I am a one issue voter –and that issue is the Bill of Rights.  Conrad Burns, who voted for the PATRIOT Act, was a Bill of Rights wrecking machine who had to go.  Good riddance! But now you have gone down the same path by voting for the NDAA of 2012, betraying the trust that Montanans placed in you to stand up for the Bill of Rights.  You blew it when it counted most.  You violated your oath.  I sincerely hope Montana Democrats select someone better in the upcoming Montana Democratic primary.   We cannot afford more of the same.

No More Pernicious Doctrine

The NDAA of 2012 is the single most dangerous and destructive anti-constitutional piece of legislation to ever pass through Congress since it strikes at the very heart of our Constitution and especially at our Bill of Rights, stripping away not just the ancient right of habeas corpus, but also directly violating the right to jury trial guaranteed by both Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution and by the Sixth Amendment, and also directly violating the Treason Clause of Article III, Section 3, which defines the crime of treason, stating:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Thus Article III clearly establishes what must be done with any Americans accused of making war against the United States or aiding the enemy – those Americans must be tried in an Article III civilian court, before a jury of their peers, and there must be two witnesses to the overt act or a confession in open court (extra evidentiary hurdles) before their lives or liberty can be taken from them, as Justices Scalia and Stevens aptly pointed out in their dissent in Hamdi.

Despite that clear constitutional trial remedy for the only crime defined by the Constitution itself, with its extra due process protections for accused Americans, the NDAA purports to instead subject Americans to indefinite military detention without trial for the duration of the war on terrorism – which may last forever – or trial before a military commission, rather than before a civilian jury as Article III plainly demands whenever any American is accused of being a traitor.

The NDAA detention provisions also directly violate the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.  There is no more unreasonable seizure of a U.S. citizen or lawful resident than having them black-bagged and “disappeared” by the U.S. military on the mere say so of the President or some subordinate within the Executive Branch, without a showing of probable cause in support of arrest before a neutral judge, and without an indictment by a Grand Jury as is required by the Fifth Amendment.   And as already noted, the right to jury trial clearly mandated by Article III and by the Sixth Amendment is grossly violated.   Such arbitrary indefinite military detention and military trial of civilians are the hallmarks of repressive dictatorships throughout history.

This act by Congress is but the latest in a long train of abuses begun by the Bush Administration and carried forward by the Obama Administration.  The Bush Administration began the assault on the Bill of Rights by using arbitrary military detention on two American citizens, Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, with Padilla “captured” at the Chicago O’Hare International Airport and detained at a military brig in the United States for three and a half years.  The Bush Administration based those detentions on a flawed World War II decision, Ex Parte Quirin (1942), wherein the same Supreme Court that gave us the horrendous Korematsu decision ruled, for the first time in U.S. history, upheld as “constitutional” the military detention and trial of American citizens as “unlawful combatants” under the laws of war rather than a trial for treason, in a civilian court, before a jury of their peers, as our Constitution demands whenever any American is accused of making war against the United States or aiding the enemy in wartime.

Before that one incident in World War II, the only other time a President had applied the laws of war to the American people was when Lincoln detained approximately 15,000 Northern civilians and tried nearly 5,000 of them by military tribunal.  That detention and trial under the laws of war was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan (1866).   Prior to that unconstitutional practice by Lincoln, all who were accused of making war against their own nation, or aiding the enemy, recieved a trial for treason, before a jury of their peers.  And after Lincoln, such an attempt to use the laws of war on the American people was not attempted again until FDR did it during World War II.    Nor was it attempted again until after 9/11.

It was then, in 2001,  that the Bush Administration used that nearly forgotten World War II Quirin decision to support a claim of power to treat America like a battlefield and to apply the laws of war to the American people, treating U.S. citizens and lawful residents the same as the people of conquered enemy nations, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, where anyone merely accused of being an “enemy” can be detained indefinitely by the military, or tried by tribunal and executed.  And the modern federal courts have given their rubber stamp of approval, most significantly in the Hamdi and Padilla cases.  And so, the flawed Quirin decision that laid around like a loaded gun for sixty years has been picked up, dusted off, and used to bring the laws of war home to America, shoving aside our Bill of Rights, and transforming America, step-by-step, into the equivalent of occupied Iraq.  Again, read Scalia’s dissent in Hamdi  an in-depth analysis of the history and cases, see the paper on this topic that Stewart Rhodes wrote in 2004 while a student at Yale Law School, which won Yale’s Judge William E. Miller Prize for best paper on the Bill of Rights.  Stewart also wrote a shorter article in 2005 for The Warrior, the journal of Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyers College, which summarized his findings.   And you can listen to a recent radio interview Stewart did on this topic, where he lays out exactly how dangerous this law will be, and provides a summary of the relevant caselaw.   As Stewart stated in his November, 2010 interview with The Daily Bell:

The modern resurrection of these dangerous doctrines, which apply the international laws of war to the American people and treat them the same as foreign enemies on foreign battlefields, is one of the principle reasons I founded Oath Keepers.

In Stewart’s above noted writings of 2004 and 2005, he warned that the logical conclusion of this application of the laws of war to the American people is not just detention and trial, but also simply killing Americans on sight, since that is what can be done to a military enemy in wartime.  And that is exactly what has begun to happen.

Obama, instead of rolling back such absurd claims of Executive Power like he promised during his campaign, has doubled down and has taken this claimed power to use the laws of war on Americans to its absurd logical conclusion by asserting that he has the power to order the killing of any American he determines is an “unlawful combatant” during the war on terrorism – just as he does with foreign enemies on a foreign battlefield.   And Obama has done just that.  He has had U.S. citizens killed.   When the “leader” of a nation can put any citizen’s name on his secret list of people to be snuffed out -  a list he concocts based on “secret evidence” he refuses to show anyone – and, without a trial, without a chance for the victims to defend themselves, and without even knowing they are on the list, those kill-on-sight orders are carried out, you are living in a dictatorship.  The U.S. routinely condemns such extra-judicial killings in other countries as gross human rights violations, and rightly so.  But now our own government claims the power to do that to any of us and has begun to do it.

And now Congress has given its overwhelming vote of approval for this insane application of the laws of war to Americans.   By passing the NDAA with these detention and trial provisions, Congress is piling on, and giving its overt support to that claimed power. What was once a power implied, ‘interpreted” and inferred by two administrations, and in various court cases has now been given overt approval by Congress, to “make it legal” while defenders of the act do the long-winded equivalent of “move along citizens, nothing to see here.” As Law Professor Jonathan Turley put it:

At least Senator Lindsey Graham was honest when he said on the Senate floor that “1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”

I am not sure which is worse: the loss of core civil liberties or the almost mocking post hoc rationalization for abandoning principle.The Congress and the President have now completed a law that would have horrified the Framers. Indefinite detention of citizens is something that the Framers were intimately familiar with and expressly sought to bar in the Bill of Rights.

See also the analysis at the Law Prof Blog and by Glenn Greenwald, here.

As Rep. Tom McClintock, speaking in opposition, aptly put it:

I rise in opposition to Section 1021 of the underlying Conference Report (H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act).

This section specifically affirms that the President has the authority to deny due process to any American it charges with “substantially supporting al Qaeda, the Taliban or any ‘associated forces’” – whatever that means.

Would “substantial support” of an “associated force,” mean linking a web-site to a web-site that links to a web-site affiliated with al-Qaeda?  We don’t know.  The question is, “do we really want to find out?”

We’re told not to worry – that the bill explicitly states that nothing in it shall alter existing law.

But wait.

There is no existing law that gives the President the power to ignore the Bill of Rights and detain Americans without due process.  There is only an assertion by the last two presidents that this power is inherent in an open-ended and ill-defined war on terrorism.  But it is a power not granted by any act of Congress.  At least, not until now.

What this bill says is, “What Presidents have only asserted, Congress now affirms in statute.”

We’re told that this merely pushes the question to the Supreme Court to decide if indefinite detainment is compatible with any remaining vestige of the Bill of Rights.

That’s a good point, IF the Court were the sole guardian of the Constitution.  But it is not.  If it were, there would be no reason to require every member of Congress to swear to preserve, protect, and defend that Constitution.

We are also its guardians.

And today, we who have sworn fealty to that Constitution sit to consider a bill that affirms a power contained in no law and that has the full potential to crack the very foundation of American liberty.

And Senator Bernie Sanders declared:

”This bill also contains misguided provisions that in the name of fighting terrorism essentially authorize the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens without charges.”

And Senator Rand Paul warned:

If you allow the government the unlimited power to detain citizens without a jury trial, you are exposing yourself to the whim of those in power. That is a dangerous game.

Across the political spectrum, Americans are waking up to what has been done, and are  indeed standing up to defend our Bill of Rights against all comers.   The apolitical nature of this alarm and resistance is well demonstrated by the fact that two retired four-star Marine Corps generals, Charles C. Krulak and Joseph P. Hoar, wrote a scathing condemnation in the N.Y Times, demanding that Obama veto the bill.  Sadly, Obama himself is an oath breaker.

While Congress does have both the power and the duty to remove oath breakers and traitors from office, with a House vote of 283 to 136 (with 14 members not voting), and a vote in the Senate of 87-13 in favor of this abomination, impeachment is a sick joke since they will not impeach themselves.  Impeachment only works when a majority in Congress take their oaths seriously, have the requisite knowledge of our Constitution to know when it is being violated, an the courage and integrity to defend it.  We are now faced with a super-majority in Congress who have amply demonstrated that they have either utter contempt for our Bill of Rights, are so ignorant that they don’t know when they are destroying the heart and soul of our Constitution, or are so cowardly that they will not take a principled stand.  In any case, they will not correct themselves, by resigning or impeaching each other, and it thus falls to We the People to step in and correct them, by removing the oath breakers from office before they complete the destruction of our Bill of Rights.

One thing that must be made clear to the oath breakers in Congress who voted for the NDAA is that there would be no Constitution if not for the promise of a Bill of Rights.   So, by destroying our Bill of Rights, they are destroying the Constitution that created the three branches of the federal government.   By destroying the Constitution, Congress is destroying itself.

We must, and we will, exhaust all peaceful means we have left of defending our Bill of Rights.   But make no mistake, we, the American people, and especially we, the American veterans, will defend our Bill of Rights at all hazards, up to and including by giving our lives in its defense.   We are duty bound to do no less.  We will not leave our children to a world without the Bill of Rights.   Our fathers and grandfathers fought, bled, and died to defeat fascism over there. We will not abide it here at home.   They honored their oaths, and we shall do the same.  And we will set aside all other differences to take this stand.  For without the Bill of Rights, America ceases to exist.

For the Republic,

Oath Keepers




SUPPORT OUR BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN
Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath


Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!



 Read More Posts

Comments posted belong to the commenter alone, and are not endorsed by Oath Keepers or the administrators for this site. We will remove offensive, racist, or threatening comments.

143 Responses to “Oath Keepers Launches National Effort to Recall and/or Remove Members of Congress Who Voted for NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, U.S. Congress!”

  1. 1
    dusty Says:

    . Recall my ass, that is Treason………they should be tried for such………

  2. 2
    Bernie Showalter Says:

    I am sending this link to Lou Dobbs and any and all journalist that might read it.

  3. 3
    frick Says:

    In light of the actions in Montana;

    An Open Message to Police & Military
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV0pl9yiURY

  4. 4
    ANTICRIME Says:

    NOT ONLY should we be cleaning government of treasonous Senators but also of treasonous federal judges, like what the citizens of the UK are now doing!

    The Brits have had enough of corrupt judges and are taking ACTION!

    THIS needs to be happening here in the USA….NOW!!!

    http://youtu.be/NMRUBlaS_qk

  5. 5
    Byron Williams Says:

    Once again you have resorted to fear-mongering and misrepresented what the bill actually says regarding who can be detained under this bill by selectively taking a very small snippet (”any person”) from the bill. The bill actually describes precisely who can be detained under section 1021:

    (b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person
    under this section is any person as follows:
    (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed,
    or aided the terrorist attacks that
    occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored
    those responsible for those attacks.
    (2) A person who was a part of or substantially
    supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated
    forces that are engaged in hostilities
    against the United States or its coalition
    partners, including any person who
    has committed a belligerent act or has directly
    supported such hostilities in aid of
    such enemy forces.

    And again, under section 1022:
    (2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in
    paragraph (1) shall apply to any person
    whose detention is authorized under section
    1021 who is determined—
    (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda
    or an associated force that acts in coordination
    with or pursuant to the direction of al-
    Qaeda; and
    (B) to have participated in the course of
    planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
    attack against the United States or
    its coalition partners.

    Additionally, section 1022 has this stipulation in regards to the law’s applicability to American citizens:

    (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
    AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
    (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement
    to detain a person in military custody
    under this section does not extend to citizens
    of the United States.
    (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement
    to detain a person in military custody
    under this section does not extend to a lawful
    resident alien of the United States on the
    basis of conduct taking place within the
    United States, except to the extent permitted
    by the Constitution of the United
    States.

    While I do agree that taking hostile forces and holding them indefinitely might be unconstitutional, the bill does not pertain to American citizens unless they are members of al-Qaeda or related forces, or have materially aided such groups, in which case they would be guilty of treason and the laws against treason would be better suited for dealing with such individuals.

    However, if you were to argue that this bill sets a precedent for further legislation that could expand the powers of arrest and detention, I would have to concede that you would then have a valid point.

  6. 6
    Robert A. Vine, Sr. Says:

    I had written to both of Georgia’s Senators when the NDAA bill came up for passage. After the bill, which they both voted in favor of, was passed they both wrote me some sophomoric drivel about how President Obama needs this legislation to better defend the country. (This is my short version of their responses.) Georgia’s two lame-ass senators are Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson. The sooner these morons are recalled, impeached or voted out of office the better for the country and the State of Georgia.

  7. 7
    Freedom Ranger Says:

    Senator Jim Demint, the self proclaimed champion defender of our constitution and liberties has also proven to be a true enemy of the people and of the Constitution. He not only voted for it’s passage, he also urged it’s passage.

    Jim Demint, like all of those who voted for the NDAA bill must be held accountable for his treacherous actions, including removal from office and tried in “the peoples court, by the people.”

  8. 8
    Jack Carpenter Says:

    Publish the list of the Members who voted for this bill so we can go to work here at home to remove them. ASAP

  9. 9
    Joe Solominsky Says:

    As a Founding Member, I give this rhetoric;
    Where does the common citizen go to say, “ enough IS enough!”?
    How does an established congress and senate, let alone president, erode constitutional rights so fast that the general population cannot keep up?
    The voice of the people is very apparent on multi-media like youtube, yahoo news, twitter and facebook, and that voice is saying: WE NEED TO BE HEARD NOW!
    That voice is saying; we need to limit government, we need to get control of the economy, we need our civil rights back, and we need control of our OWN lives!
    Less government control and regulation would let us create more jobs and companies. It would let us
    defend our families where police forces cannot reach the crime until something fatal has occurred. Where have our liberties gone when we cannot vocalize, nor speak for fear of repercussion?
    Less government would set us on a path to liberty.
    How do we correct this? How do us, the people, speak up and state our grievances that the State and Federal government continue to make?
    How are we to be heard as the so-called[ lower class]?
    We [the people] are told to vote and talk to our representatives regarding our issues. What happens when that option turns into a dry stream bed?
    The American people want and NEED the option to change things now!
    We are not the cannon fodder that the government believes, nor are we the dimwits that technology leads us to believe!
    This country was founded on the ideal that we would protect ourselves from all enemies; both foreign and domestic. It was founded on the principal that all men were created equal in their endeavors.
    This country was created with the auspice that we are to protect ourselves from tyranny, to care for each other and to self-govern not just the states, but the family as well.
    The Constitution is perfect in the fact that it is malleable to the wants and needs of society…in that it justifies certain in-alienable rights and guarantees provisions for the personal freedom FROM government.
    So what does the common citizen do to be heard?
    How do we ensure our rights under the Castle Doctrine when the state law pre-empts charges to keep law abiding citizens from owning a fire-arm?
    How do we, as citizens and patriots, voice our concern and get things accomplished aside from the election process and aside from lobbyists?
    I believe that the answer to a lot of today’s problems is to get the government out of local communities. Once we foster a strong sense of independence between families, the need for community will grow. This was the basis for capitalism in that someone always coveted thy neighbor’s belongings. Therefore someone will charge a penalty for that product.
    The point of this article is to start a behavioral change for the better. I believe culture is something learned out of respect. I believe that respect and tolerance for one another is paramount to the success of not only our county, but our state, country and world as well.
    Please feel free to publish this under my name. It is a message I strongly convey as a founding Oath Keeper.
    I apologize I have not kept up my dues as my family and I are still struggling in this economy.
    Sincerely,

    Joseph M. Solominsky

  10. 10
    louis gonzales Says:

    Everything appears so futile in the present. There is still the open-ended and stonewalled issue of Barack Obama’s alleged – with most evidence pointing in the affirmative – fraudulent Connecticut social security number, not to mention the fact that – most evidence points to the affirmative – that Barack Obama doesn’t even meet Article II, Section I, Clause 5 requirement of “natural born citizen.”

    His father, inarguably [was] a British subject, never a citizen of America.

    Arizona Sheriff Joseph Arpaio is set to release a preliminary report on the investigation his “Cold Case Posse” has launched, in February.

    It simply stands, [we] have an ineligible person occupying our highest office, with BOTH the GOP and the DemocRATic party derelict of oath, duty, and obligation, and the People of the United States could nearly care less at this.

    What should we expect with the NDAA, when at least half of our citizen brethren care more about the color of the president’s skin, then as to whether or not the Constitution in full is observed and honored, INCLUDING the eligibility of the office of president.

    Disgusted,
    - Louis Gonzales

  11. 11
    slobo Says:

    IAW NDAA you may be snatched off of the street…to vanish forever…for working against this act, or, those legislatures who voted for it. Be careful that you do not wind up in a windowless cell, whereabouts unknown.

  12. 12
    mike Says:

    Sounds like a great idea!! Lets do it. We need a major house cleaning in Washington!!!

  13. 13
    David Segesta Says:

    Thank you for taking a principled stand againat the freedom destroying section 1021 of the National Defense, Appropriations Act. Recalling the people who voted for it is a great idea.

  14. 14
    jaydee Says:

    Hallelujah !!!! Hallelujah !!! PRAISE GOD FOR THE OATHKEEPERS !!!! THANK YOU !!! BLESS YOU MIGHTILY !!!!
    For the longest time, Ive been meaning to join as an associate member … but this is it … Im joining now !!!!! I LOVE YOU GUYS !!!! YOU ARE A BLESSING TO THIS NATION !!! I will be praying over each of you !!!!

  15. 15
    David Segesta Says:

    Which fund should we donate to, to support the recall effort?

  16. 16
    shar Says:

    thank you for all your hard work our country will survive because of people like you.Bless you

  17. 17
    Thomas Payne Says:

    Removal or recall? How about ARREST and CONVICTION for TRAITOROUS acts against the American People???
    These criminals belong in JAIL!

  18. 18
    Timothy Votaw Says:

    This is a bi-partisan effort to choke off citizen independence from the government’s control. It is the first shot of a volley of restriction of Constitutional rights. We’ve allowed this to happen by our complacency and the gradual deterioration of our nation into socialism. Obama and his administration are the point of the spear, with members of Congress and the courts in tow.

    The question you gotta ask yourselves: When will we have had enough, and how much further up our asses will we allow this social disease to creep before we break it off? This is one Marine warrior ready to stand up, again, this time for our survival as a Republic. I’ve predicted for years that some day, we would be placed in a position where we might face fellow Americans in a new, sad and preventable civil conflict. It’s Obama’s class warfare at work.

  19. 19
    Phantom warrior Says:

    If true, then this is a travesy that really does border on treason. In fact it would be such an affront to our constitution as to cause one to question the validity of the claim. If true, not only should these members of congress be removed from office, they should be denied any priviledges or benefits of office, to include any pension or other compensation. Incidently, that is only a bare minum. A trial for treason should also be considered. If true, this is incredibly serious. It’s so scandelous that one must wonder why this is not a major news story, not even on FOX or Talk Radio. This needs to be carefully looked in to in case it is bogus. Frankly, it’s to awful to even imagine not to mention dangerous.

  20. 20
    Tom Shaffrey Says:

    Keep up the great work, Oath Keepers. You may be our only hope.

  21. 21
    E.H. Foreman Says:

    If sections 1021 and 1022 are so innocuous, then why did they have to be included at all ? What are this bill’s apologists pushing ?

    In the bigger picture, these paragraphs will help elevate more clearly the key issue and identify the sides.

  22. 22
    richtissot Says:

    U can publish my adress. l’m not ashamed 2 stand up 4 the Constitution or the gospel of Christ!
    Who’s the clown not doing his homework? Whoever the president declares an enemy combatant. Maybe this person should read the pamphlet of joint terrorism task force,which even designates LONERS as terrorists! l suppose the patriot act & REX84 don’t pertain 2 us either?
    Are U aware that if the president so desires, he can be this destructive:lf they want 2 designate U an enemy combatant/terrorist they can actually get U 4 buying a foreign product instead of domestic, saying “u intended 2 overthrow the economy”.
    Do these critics think we’re Christian radicals or have nothing better 2 do than prpagandize,as the gov’t does?
    l’m sure that some members are lawyers & sure U thoroughly research B4 U print.lf the person wants 2 believe “it can’t happen in America” or “can’t happen 2 me”, he may as well fasten his shackles on now! The Watchman

  23. 23
    Elaine Says:

    Right after they passed this bill, I called Tim Huelskamp’s DC office to ask how he voted on it. He represents the Kansas 1st District in the House. Was informed that he voted yes on it. Just wanted Kansans to know.

  24. 24
    Elaine Says:

    By the way, this is his first term. He is supposed to be a big Conservative. Am ashamed to admit that I voted for him, having swallowed his crap.

  25. 25
    Stan Says:

    Thanks for this clear statement of intention, Stewart. And good for the Oath Keepers organization for keeping clear about what a true patriot stands for, rather than some people and sites who wrap themselves in that flag but are obviously for a fascist takeover – as in the days of Gen. Butler. They’re not standing for the Constitution; they are angling for a fascist New World Order, which is as toxic in its way as a socialistic New World Order is in its, since they are both totalitarian in nature, not constitutionally protected by nature. And at the top of the pyramid of power, they come together, in the same “den of vipers” controlling both sides of the political aisle, so that it doesn’t really matter which puppet is out in front, furthering that common cause.

    Except that in the current instance, true patriots are being given an opportunity for another approach to the problem, of cleansing the Augean stables of the national government of those who would destroy the American Constitution because it is the one thing standing in the way of their best-laid plans. And that is to act decisively in regards to the by-now obvious ineligibility of the current occupier of the office of the president of the U.S. to hold that most honorable office. And in doing so, We the People can kill two birds with one stone – and legally to boot.

    I refer to the ultimate citizen’s act of a march on Washington of We, the People, Assembled, led by Oathkeepers, serving, retired, and citizenry in spirit, surrounding the White House and not leaving until the current occupier of that sullied office either verifies his eligibility for that (particular) office, by releasing all of his bona fides (that he has sequestered; including his original vault copy, long-form birth certificate – a facsimile of which released by him has been proven, in the eyes and detailed explanations of a number of experts, to be a forgery; as has been the earlier, COLB version that was supposed to keep the populace quiet and asleep at the switch going on in their national government, from a constitutional republic to an oligarchy) for expert scrutiny, or, as seems the more likely, given all the time there has been to clear this constitutional-crisis matter up, vacates the office forthwith; The People installing then an Officer OF The People, to (a) dissolve Congress (for having failed to uphold their constitutional duty & responsibility in this major matter, and in some cases even aiding and abetting this crime, for which they will be tried in a proper, cleansed court of law); (b) call for elections within a time certain (say 90 days); and (c) clean out the stables of the executive branch of government, of its accessories to the outrageous crime that has been committed on the American people in this matter. By both political parties, and over some period of time. So the result of the claim back of power to The People is definitely not going to be ‘business as usual’ after the dust has settled from these particular departures.

    And to note: All the legislation that the usurper has signed into law, and appointments made, will thenceforth be null and void, and the American people can start over with a clean slate after this purloined presidency. And including the cleaning up or outright revocation of the so-called Patriot Act, which was premised on false pretenses, of who, precisely, was behind 9/11. The truth – the whole truth – of which will be uncovered as well, during the interim administration of the Officer of The People. For the days of secrecy are over, and all will be revealed.

    To the consternation of many; including ‘innocents’, over what all has been going on in their name. But that’s what happens when The People fall asleep, and Let George Do It. He usually does. It takes more to run a government of, by, and for The People than some citizens seem to have been aware of, and become accustomed to. The bottom-line message here: Govern yourself; or you will be governed by tyrants.

    Tyrants, who have now put in place legislation that could possibly keep such words from being uttered, for being declared “a belligerent act”, or ‘giving aid and comfort to the enemy,’ or some such sophistic nonsense – threatened now, because the definition of a ‘terrorist’ is close to being anybody who the executive branch of the federal government deems so, the definition having been made so vague, and open to interpretation (as it is being used, in that way and for that broad-net purpose in the UK as we speak).

    Clearly, time is now very much of the essence. There IS a better world waiting for us on the other side of this divide, between the Old and the New. But it will take some doing to bring it about.

    So where are YOU in that challenge, Citizen? Or has America gone soft, with Sunshine Patriots abounding. If so, then she will have to endure her fate, at the hands of tyrants; who are like the bacteria that devour a body when it has died.

    A shame. On the heads of those Patriots. And for their children’s sake. And grandchildren. And the world.

  26. 26
    Lee Says:

    Awesome News! :-@

  27. 27
    richtissot Says:

    I 4 got 1st & 4most 2 thank U brothers 4 initiating this effort! l agree with 1 comment on treason.
    Stewart, wasn’t Denny Rheberg lt. gov.?
    The MT “representatives” are definately the place 2 start!

  28. 28
    Buck Says:

    I may have missed it , but I did not see a complete list of all that voted for passage of this criminal legislation . Thank You !

  29. 29
    Jeff Says:

    OK, I’m in, how do we get a recall started, didn’t want McCain, don’t feel he can be trusted now or anytime in the future.

  30. 30
    Raymond Says:

    This Was Your Life http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0001/0001_01.asp

  31. 31
    Raymond Says:

    Working people frequently ask retired people what they do to make their days interesting. Well, for example, the other day I went downtown and into a shop. I was only there for about 5 minutes, and when I came out, there was a cop writing out a parking ticket. I said to him, ‘Come on, man, how about giving a retired person a break’? He ignored me and continued writing the ticket. I called him a ‘Nazi.’ He glared at me and wrote another ticket for having worn tires. So I called him a ‘doughnut eating Gestapo.’ He finished the second ticket and put it on the windshield with the first. Then he wrote a third ticket. This went on for about 20 minutes. The more I abused him the more tickets he wrote. Personally, I didn’t care. I came downtown on the bus, and the car that he was putting the tickets on had a bumper sticker that said, ‘I ♥ Obama.’ I try to have a little fun each day now that I’m retired. It’s important to my health.

  32. 32
    stephen3 Says:

    I also would like to know who voted for the bill. Our biggest enemy that we have is in DC.

  33. 33
    Lee Says:

    Here is the House…. http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/268602/20111216/ndaa-did-congress-member-vote.htm

    Here is the Senate….. http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/ndaa-passage-final-transcript-from-senate-floor/

  34. 34
    Ken D. Webber Says:

    I am writing to DEBUNK Byron Williams above. There are two parts, 1021 and 1022. 1021 DOES apply to American citizens, it applies to any person who “has committed a belligerent act.” The authority is then given to export such persons to a foreign country for purposes of an interrogation. It is during this interrogation/torture session that a person is determined to either be a “covered person” or not. So if during your torture session you admit that you gave up your citizenship to join whatever terrorist group they are accusing you of being in, then you are no longer protected. They may then kill you or send you off to a prison somewhere for the rest of your life. On the face, it appears that this bill gives no new powers. That is a lie because the “interrogation” takes place OUTSIDE US LEGAL JURISDICTION. So the new law is… What happens in the jungles of South America, stays in the jungles of South America. The wording of the bill DOES allow everything I have described and anyone whose read the bill already knows this. You come across as a government shill Byron… or extremely naive.

  35. 35
    Alan Says:

    Here ib the State of Indiana we have a similar issue coming afore us! Mike Pence is wanting to be Governor of Indiana, he is now a Reppresentative, and voted for the NDAA. This Neo-Con crafted the USA PATRIOT Act and continues to vote for extension of the sunset provisions (Lone-Wolf). Now the Conservatives of Indiana are ousting a 36 year incumbent Senator (Lugar) for a Constitutionalist in Mourdock, but will vote the Neo-Con Pence into office. Unbelievable! As much as I try I cannot get the constituents of Indiana to see the grave mistake they’ll make in putting Pence into office. When we were in DC in November, I got to speak to Pence about the PATRIOT Act and did he have the excuses! After it was all said and done, more was said than actually done! I hope the good people of Indiana will finally wise up and not elect Pence to office, but we’ll see how far they have actually pulled their heads out of the sand?

  36. 36
    Frederick Huppertz Says:

    As a founding member, I strongly request clarification— (1)Are we discussing “National Defense APPROPRIATIONS Act Of 2012″, or”National Defense AUTHORIZATION Act for Fiscal Year 2012″???? Are they the same, or different? If it is true what you say that this Act refers to citizens and lawful residents, then I, representing Oath Keepers, will pursue and support 100%.(2) Otherwise, someone representing Oath Keepers must explain to the membership page 362 17(1) that says this detention DOES NOT extend to citizens, and 21(2) that states that this detention DOES NOT extend to lawful residents. Why is there such a difference between what you say, and what the Act says?
    It appears to me that either you are making a dreadful mistake, or purposely misleading us which would be devestating to me as a loyal dedicated member. Please address matter immediately. You may address this concern directly to my e-mail so that I do not miss your response. Perhaps a response to the entire membership would also be appropiate.
    I hope and pray that this is just a misunderstanding that can be quickly cleared up, so that I may pursue Stewart’s direction on this.
    Thanks for your prompt response. From a loyal member, Frederick.

  37. 37
    Lee Says:

    In reading these replies, I must say thank you!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0heL2Czeraw

  38. 38
    TS Says:

    I have been amazed at how many do not realize just what the Oath is. The three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take an Oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. Once given, the Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge.
    The wording of the Presidential Oath ( to “preserve, protect and defend the US Constitution”) was already established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all other Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure. Hence the need for Statue 1 to define the administration of the Oath.

    Domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution. They are also those who support those in action, or by inaction; vote, voice, money, etc who are going against or trying to weaken the US Constitution and the Peoples written guarantee of those Rights.

    The framers of the Constitution intended that the States, in proper cases. hold unconstitutional acts of Congress and acts of the legislatures. The subject was fully discussed not only in the Constitutional Convention, but also in the State ratifying conventions and in print. Oliver Ellsworth, Connecticut Convention, stated clearly: “This Constitution defines the extent of the powers of the general government. If the general legislature, Congress should at any time overleap their limits, if the United States go beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void”.
    “The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” The Supreme Court of the United States

    If there were never intended to be action to defend the Constitution from those who are domestically attempting to destroy its power and authority, why would each oath require it?

  39. 39
    toby Says:

    do you have any police or militia or government behind you?

  40. 40
    Freeman Says:

    We are resurrecting our freedom.
    As I hear you are also doing…?
    IF so, then I propose we work together on this.
    We have enough to do this now, the backing of our military, and financing in place.
    IF you are interested, you have my email.
    Thank you.

  41. 41
    Ron Jagnecki Says:

    Show a list of those who voted for the bill.

  42. 42
    donald rutledge, sgt Says:

    recall all of them

  43. 43
    Allen Pollick Says:

    I too, as a founding member of The Oath Keepers, agree with Mr. Joe Solominsky. 100% !

    I believe that what we MUST do, in order to show the United States people and our government, our seriousness and our utter determination to save and maintain our Constitution by whatever means as necessary to maintain our Freedom for ourselves and our children, is to LET EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES BE AWARE OF OUR DETERMINATION TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, NO MATTER THE COST.

    HERE IS WHAT i PROPOSE:

    We should have a letter written/printed out by and distributed by the Oath Keepers via the computer or regular postal services. It should be constructed professionally and very intelligently.

    This letter should be made available to each oath keeper member either by internet or USPS.

    This letter could then be signed by each member of oath Keepers and sent to their electorate.

    This letter should state in no uncertain terms our dedication to the the principles we espouse.

    This letter should state firmly and unequivocally that all of us, and there ARE many of us,
    will do whatever it takes to see to it that those who voted for this law/bill will be removed from office by whatever lawful means necessary to do so.

    After signed, these letters should be sent as a huge volume of mail/email to be sent and delivered to the elected officials all at one time so that they “get the message”.

    SIMPLY OVERWHELM THEM AND GET THEIR ATTENTION AND KNOW THAT THEY ARE BEING WATCHED ALSO.

    Thank you for letting me speak my mind also.

    Allen Pollick (Alvanpilot/Pennsylvania)

    This letter should also be given air-time on tv and be explained so that amny other Americans can know what is going on behind their backs also.

    This letter should NAME “ALL” THOSE WHO VOTED FOR THIS BILL!

    This letter should be able to be sent to all of our state’s respective elected officials.

  44. 44
    Kim Paddock A.S.D. Says:

    What about the legislation that states that if an American citizen goes into another country and commits a crime there that, although it’s legal in that country, if it’s not legal here then you can be arrested upon entry when you come back to this country? The only “evidence” required is someone’s say-so which violates our due process. This illegal expansion of American borders to include the whole world plus the absolute violation of our Civil Rights is a crime that is equal to none and yet it gets little attention. I can suppose that the legislation in question will then kick in as almost anyone can be considered a “terrorist” these days. Terrorists include: plumbers since they have access to pipes and compounds to make bombs, people who stockpile food, gold, silver, guns, ammunition, non-electric machines, and other essential items. If you’ve found yourself on this short list then you can be considered a terrorist. If not, read the full list.

  45. 45
    Travis Says:

    John Cornyn of my state, Texas, helped draft the damned thing! According to his website,

    “”We must always remember that our government’s primary responsibility is to protect and defend the American people and advance the interests of the United States.”

    — Senator John Cornyn

    A Leader in Strengthening our National Security
    As a Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Cornyn plays a key role in drafting the National Defense Authorization Act. This important legislation authorizes appropriations for and creates policies governing the Department of Defense, U.S. military personnel, and military operations in support of the global war on terror.”

    Where’s the list? Let’s do what we gotta do…

    Travis Perry
    Persian Gulf Vet USMC

  46. 46
    montanabecki Says:

    I believe it to be helpful to understand our enemies so that we can see their moves as they make them therefore it is possible to counteract them as they happen. In this spirit, I would like to give you some information I have found about our enemy George Soros. At this point in time, most of us (I hope) are aware of the New World Order agenda of the elite, spearheaded by George Soros. I found a couple of articles about him which completely reveal his agenda; “The Capitalist Threat” was in fact, written by him and was published in “The Atlantic Monthly” in February, 1997. This first link gives a bit of an overview of him: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/7/25/104735.shtml
    and the second link is to his article: http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/97feb/capital/capital.htm.
    You will plainly see it unfolding at this time in history and become aware of what is next on his agenda. THANK YOU OATH KEEPERS! May God be with you and bless all who fight for this country!

  47. 47
    Max Sanchez USN/RET Says:

    An interesting letter in the Australian Shooter Magazine:
    “If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq Theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.
    The firearm death rate in Washington, DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period.
    That means you are about 25 per cent more likely to be shot and killed in the US capital which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the U..S., than you are in Iraq.
    Conclusion: The U.S. should pull out of Washington.”

    GOD BLESS
    Pastor Max Sanchez USN/RET

  48. 48
    Richard Rutledge Says:

    JEFF SESSIONS
    ALABAMA
    COMMITTEES:
    BUDGET
    Ranking Member
    JUDICIARY
    ARMED SERVICES
    WASHINGTON, DC 20510-0104
    December 13,2011
    Mr. Richard Rutledge
    804 Shadywood Lane
    Birmingham, Alabama 35206
    Dear Mr. Rutledge:
    Thank you for contacting me regarding S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act
    (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012, which was passed by the Senate on December 1 , 2011.
    As you mention in your correspondence, this legislation contains provisions reaffirming
    the United States’ authority to capture and detain in military custody individuals determined to
    be unprivileged enemy belligerents. The notion that S.l867 creates anew, broad authority for
    the President to detain United States citizens is mistaken. The legislation merely codifies
    existing law that has long been upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States and is
    consistent with the recognized law of war.
    Specifically, Section 1031 authorizes, but does not require, the military to detain
    unprivileged enemy belligerents captured in the course of hostilities consistent with the law of
    war. Individuals who can be held in military custody are those who planned, authorized,
    committed, or aided in the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, harbored terrorists
    responsible for those attacks, or who are part of or substantially support al-Qaeda and the
    Taliban. The section specifically states that they may be held without trial only until the end of
    hostilities, consistent with current policy and Supreme Court precedent. Moreover, Amendment
    1456, which was adopted, clarifies that no provision “in this section shall be construed to affect
    existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens.”
    Section 1032 requires that certain unprivileged enemy belligerents – those determined to
    be members of al-Qaeda or an affiliated entity and those Who have participated ill.planning or
    carrying out an attack against the U.S. or its coalition partners – be detained in military custody.
    This requirement, however, explicitly excludes United States citizens, and states that persons
    covered by this Section may only be held until the end of hostilities. However, the
    administration has the authority to waive this requirement in the interests of national security
    Page 2
    December 13, 2011
    Section l036 requires that the Secretary of Defense submit a report to Congress
    establishing procedures for determining the status of persons captured in the course of the
    hostilities. Under this section, unprivileged enemy belligerents must receive a hearing before a
    military judge for a determination of whether the individual is rightly categorized as an
    unprivileged enemy belligerent before they can be held long-term. In this proceeding, the
    individual can elect to have military counsel.
    As you can see, these provisions were necessary to provide much needed clarity on the
    detainment of enemies of the United States in the War on Terror and were the result of a
    bipartisan compromise.
    Thank you again for writing. Your comments and advice are always welcome.
    Very truly yours,
    Jeff Sessions
    United States Senator

  49. 49
    Richard Rutledge Says:

    Terrie Sewell National Defense Reauthorization Act
    Mrs.Sewell be aware that the provisions in this Bill that now brings the Continental US into the global battlefield on terror and allows the potential of indefinite Detention of US Citizens by our Military is creating a state of absolute panic all across this nation among many of its Citizens. These provisions are in direct violation to the US Constitution and absolutely shred our Bill of Rights. This is a very very serious issue and I beg you to look HARD at the offending provisions in this Bill as they are being referred to here. This is from the right from the left Democrats and Republicans minor Party members and Independents and all are SCREAMING out the same message to our elected Leadership in Washington (like yourself in my case Terri). We speak to this matter with one voice and ask you our elected Representatives’ PLEASE STOP THIS BILL as long as the portion pertaining to indefinite detention remains intact within that Bill..
    My Party Conservative Party USA has released this in opposition
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EStwmlIKjk
    The national Military group Oathkeepers which contains high ranking members of the current military has now released a list of 10 orders that their members will refuse to obey even under threat of a Court marshal.
    This is the Oathkeepers video in opposition to this Bill
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtrP7PYIJL0&feature=related
    Restore the Republic
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwedx6kZhHg&feature=player_embedded
    MSNBC’s Oberman
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZSc95tfgIE&feature=related
    Fox News and Judge Napolitano
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V4oqr5iP-g&feature=player_embedded
    The Group Anonymous who are behind Occupy
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrXyLrTRXso&feature=share
    I can easily fill many pages of this email with similar videos coming from from very very diverse Political groups in ideology and from all across this nation.
    Mrs Sewell be aware that the internet is absolutely ablaze over these particular provisions in this Bill. Terri I beg you as my personal Representative to listen if not to me to the unified voice of the American people on this matter and not support this Bill unless these provisions on Indefinite Detention are completely stricken from it.
    Know this that all across this nation Democrats, Independents and Republicans alike and we will ALL be carefully watching the actions taken by ALL of our Elected Representatives on this Bill.
    Sincerely your constituent
    Richard Rutledge
    Chairman Conservative Party (Alabama)
    December 20/2011
    —– Original Message —–
    From: AL07CRMIncoming@housemail.house.gov
    To: rutledge8021@bellsouth.net
    Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 3:29 PM
    Subject: A Message from Congresswoman Terri Sewell

    December 20, 2011
    Mr. Richard Rutledge
    804 Shadywood Ln
    Birmingham, AL 35206-1701
    Dear Mr. Rutledge:
    Thank you for contacting my office regarding the National Defense Reauthorization Act. Your thoughts and opinions about this issue are very important to me, and I very much appreciate you reaching out to me.
    I voted in favor of the National Defense Reauthorization Act because it provides for the allocation of money and resources that our troops desperately need to finish the job in Afghanistan and Iraq; and although the bill contained controversial provisions, I believe that the legislation that passed the house by a vote of 283-136 was a bipartisan compromise that ensures America’s national defense and security.
    The National Defense Reauthorization Act contained provisions that will require tougher sanctions against those dealing with Iran’s Central Bank and that will freeze much needed counterinsurgency aid to Pakistan until Islamabad cracks down on the spread of improvised explosive devices and bomb making materials into Afghanistan. Both of these provisions are in the security interest of the United States, and although the legislation was not perfect, the National Defense Reauthorization Act will strengthen America’s military and further our economic, political and military interest. H.R. 1540 also makes significant improvements to the sexual assault and harassment policies of the Department of Defense; and moving forward, I will continue to work closely with my Colleagues here in the House of Representatives to pass comprehensive and bipartisan legislation that truly reflects the will of the American people.
    Once again, thank you for contacting my office. I look forward to hearing from you in the future about this and other issues of importance to our community, the state of Alabama, and our nation.
    Sincerely,
    Terri Sewell
    Member of congress

  50. 50
    BarbarainSC Says:

    I have no representation of any kind in the House or the Senate. Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint owe their allegiance to the New World Order and Rep. Joe Wilson is locked in a time warp somewhere. My contacting them is useless. Hope recall is feasible.

  51. 51
    Shaggy Says:

    It’s a waste of time to initiate recall petitions. State recall laws only apply to state officials. Senators and Representatives can only be removed by impeachment, the election process, resignation or retirement.

  52. 52
    Lee Says:

    As a Founding Member, and a Lifetime Member, I sit here scratching my head at some of these questions, that you are demanding. #1 – Where is the list? The very simple answer is !, just click on the links in the very first paragraph of Stewart’s Article, that have a different color of most, and say House and Senate, and simple amazing, it pops up the list. But, just to make it easier for you, I just did a simple search, and posted different links that have spelled out, Here is the link for the House, and here is the link for the Senate.

    #2 Question! Are these the same? (1)Are we discussing “National Defense APPROPRIATIONS Act Of 2012″, or”National Defense AUTHORIZATION Act for Fiscal Year 2012″???? Are they the same, or different?

    Now, if you are like me, you already know that I have personally linked to an article, in this comment section, http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2011/12/01/stewart-rhodes-interview-citizen-detention-act-senate-has-declared-war-on-american-people/?cp=all#comments

    which is the second to last post, Elias’s is the last one. It clearly “States” how these two are muddled together, but I guess some people just decide to throw up questions, that have already been answered, right here on this board, because they have nothing else to do. Specific Link for Mr.Frederick Huppertz….. http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/

    But since I’m not a Constitutional Attorney like Stewart, I will patiently wait for his answer, which I already know what it is going to be!!!!!

    If you see anybody over there in the corner, banging their head against the wall, saying “Good Grief”, it’s probably me!

  53. 53
    joe Says:

    These traitorous Congressmen/women should be arrested, jailed, and tried for treason. Having them removed from office, but free to roam the country and create more menace behind the scenes poses a real threat to our national security, and the well-being of our country. They cannot be trusted. They have already proven that! They need to be incarcerated in order to protect our national security.

  54. 54
    tom Says:

    Arrest them for seditious conspiracy asap! Signing the NDAA was a criminal act! They must be incarcerated in order to protect our national security. They destroyed our trust in them. They do not deserve trust outside of Congress either. They are a danger to their country!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seditious_conspiracy

  55. 55
    Elias Alias Says:

    From Congressman Ron Paul’s website -

    http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1936:the-ndaa-repeals-more-rights&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69

    -

    The NDAA Repeals More Rights

    Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed. The 4th amendment has been rendered toothless by the PATRIOT Act. No more can we truly feel secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects when now there is an exception that fits nearly any excuse for our government to search and seize our property. Of course, the vast majority of Americans may say “I’m not a terrorist, so I have no reason to worry.” However, innocent people are wrongly accused all the time. The Bill of Rights is there precisely because the founders wanted to set a very high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty. To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured.

    The PATRIOT Act, as bad is its violation of the 4th Amendment, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) continues that slip toward tyranny and in fact accelerates it significantly. The main section of concern, Section 1021 of the NDAA Conference Report, does to the 5th Amendment what the PATRIOT Act does to the 4th. The 5th Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning. It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented or access to legal counsel.

    The dangers in the NDAA are its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the US government without trial. It is now no longer limited to members of al Qaeda or the Taliban, but anyone accused of “substantially supporting” such groups or “associated forces.” How closely associated? And what constitutes “substantial” support? What if it was discovered that someone who committed a terrorist act was once involved with a charity? Or supported a political candidate? Are all donors of that charity or supporters of that candidate now suspect, and subject to indefinite detainment? Is that charity now an associated force?

    Additionally, this legislation codifies in law for the first time authority to detain Americans that has to this point only been claimed by President Obama. According to subsection (e) of section 1021, “[n]othing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” This means the president’s widely expanded view of his own authority to detain Americans indefinitely even on American soil is for the first time in this legislation codified in law. That should chill all of us to our cores.

    The Bill of Rights has no exemptions for “really bad people” or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the bill of rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire Unites States is a battlefield in the War on Terror. This is a very dangerous development indeed. Beware.

    -

  56. 56
    Jim Hyatt Says:

    Thank You.
    If we can finally remove the twisted scum in Helena, once and for all, we may have a real chance at ridding our sky’s of the psychopathic aircraft, with their chemical death-dumps, who poison our Children, our land, our water and our air every single solitary day, and let us settle the wolf issue as it should be settled, with a 7mm, and allow us the freedom to use the option of Nullification when necessary. And then we can tell the U.N., and the NGO’s, and ICLEI precisely where to go. We can once again open up our roads, take down all of the damn gates and Kelly berms.
    Sell and consume our own raw milk products and produce, like it was done in the beginning, before this State allowed criminal organizations like the FDA and USDA to operate here.
    In my mind, it’s quite obvious that this type of conduct calls for much more than just Recall.
    Crime doesn’t get much higher than this. Does it? Is this conduct not a precursor to pre-crime writ large? Crime on a MASSIVE scale perpetrated by the most trusted in our own State and Federal Governments?
    And we’re paying for this privilege??
    I still think we’re going to need a lot more bleach to clean THAT toilet! Who knows, maybe Justice will roll down hill to the local criminals as well. But I also believe that this may well be the match to light the fire in the minds of men. Something this big, and this important is going to require the support of all of us to make it happen. If this effort gains momentum in other States, it could really shake the pillars of Heaven, and bring God’s wrath down upon all of these traitors, one by one, before they bring their wrath down on us.

  57. 57
    Churchill Says:

    Yea, being a resident of the Idaho panhandle, I’ll inform that both Idaho Senators, Crapo and Risch also voted for the NDAA. I first followed up on an Intel Hub article and found a partial list on which showed that Crapo and Risch vote yea. then I got in touch with my local Representatives wife to let them know. then, on a Ron Paul website listed Crapo and Risch as voting nea and after that, a link from one of your commenters also showed where Crapo and Risch vote nea. Then again, I turned around and called my Rep again. He stated that he was in touch with several other Idaho Reps which all stated that the two Idaho Senators both voted yea for the NDAA. One of those Idaho Reps just previous had a phone conversation with Senator Risch in which, Risch was whining around about being mis-informed on the NDAA. I’m unsure of what Senator Crapo’s excuse would of been.

  58. 58
    steve Says:

    RESISTANCE to TYRANTS IS Obedience to God: (Thomas Jefferson)

  59. 59
    bj Says:

    The only job these Senators and Congress people have IS to be informed. That IS their job. Don’t let any one of them claim now that they didn’t know what was happening. Any Senator or Congressional Representative traitor to their country who signed the NDAA should just be turning themselves in to their local law enforcement. Down the road, WE the people, can decide whether they will get an attorney or not. Maybe WE the people courts will be more lenient on those who voluntarily turn themselves in to law enforcement custody. These traitors are criminals.

    from Wikipedia
    Seditious conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384) is a crime under US law.
    “ If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined or imprisoned not less than 20 years, or both. ”
    As may be seen from the text above, a crime need only be planned: it need not even be attempted.”

  60. 60
    RKnight Says:

    they should be jailed!!! or worse it’s an act of treason, I know the oath i took!!!

  61. 61
    Jera Anderson Says:

    To the folks questioning the applicability issue to United States citizens of this Bill, I agree that clarification is warranted. My opinion follows:

    SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

    This section applies DIRECTLY to U.S. citizens since NO WHERE in THIS SECTION’S verbiage are U.S. CITIZENS specifically excluded.

    SEC. 1022. MILITARY CUSTODY FOR FOREIGN ALQAEDA TERRORISTS.
    This section as entitled deals specifically with custody of “Foreign Alqaeda Terrorists” and goes as far as addressing that applicability in (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.— (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody UNDER THIS SECTION[emphasis added] does not extend to citizens of the United States.

    My conclusion: if you DO NOT explicitly exclude United States citizens from any specific sections’ applicability, then by DEFAULT,[which has been upheld by U.S. Courts for decades] WE ARE INCLUDED!!

  62. 62
    bj Says:

    Please feel free to eliminate any sentences in the above comment which are jumping the gun at this time.

  63. 63
    bj Says:

    More in depth review – please feel free to edit or hold off if again too soon to print

    http://ironboltbruce.blog.com/

  64. 64
    Kyle Murray Says:

    I sent some of this along with my own comments to my congressman and some family and friends.. Thank you for helping to organize this.. i will try to get the tea party here in cincinnati involved to put the pressure on our republican congressman who voted for this horrible bill.

  65. 65
    Robert Fallin Says:

    I hope federal law enforcement and military members realize they will be as the Redcoats of King George if they try to implement this action, with the same results as Lexington and Concord.

  66. 66
    RON Says:

    I have been paying attention to politics for over 20 years researhcing politicians and presidents, and some negativeS found ,however the present potus and gang are THE WORST and on their way to destroy the constitution and the republic,and as patriots it is our job to help “wake up america! we have to many politically correct “sune shine summertime ” people that need to wake up! i am a older trooper of the 101st AIRBORNE WITH NO REVERSE!GOD BLESS AMERICA AND “TOGETHER WE STAND!”THANKS FOR ALL THE OATH KEEPERS, AS WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE! AIBORNE!!!

  67. 67
    TS Says:

    What part of “They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure” does everyone seem to be missing? They are REQUIRED to keep that Oath to stay in the office/position they are currently occupying. It is a requirement.
    Their Oath is to “support and defend the US Constitution”, or if the POTUS, to “preserve, protect and defend the US Constitution” and it has not been done.
    From the Patriot Act, Prolonged Detention, Pre Crime, searches without warrants, Operation Gunrunner (Fast and Furious) – which makes them traitors and murderers under our laws, and more including the NDAA.

    If there were never intended to be action to defend the Constitution from those who are domestically attempting to destroy its power and authority, why would each Oath require it of those taking the Oaths?

    Read this and understand: “Domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution. They are also those who support those in action, or by inaction; vote, voice, money, etc who are going against or trying to weaken the US Constitution and the Peoples written guarantee of those Rights”.
    This means that anything that has been added to the US Constitution now or in the past (or made a la/bill/amendment/etc) was put into place by a domestic enemy, making it “void”, “not legal”, etc.

    The Supreme Court said (before it was filled with domestic enemies): The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. NO DOCTRINE INVOLVING MORE PERNICIOUS CONSEQUENCES WAS EVER INVENTED BY THE WIT OF MAN THAN THAT ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS CAN BE SUSPENDED DURING ANY OF THE GREAT EXIGENCIES OF GOVERNMENT. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” The Supreme Court of the United States

    This means they have no legality to take away our Rights (along with amendment 9).
    The subject was fully discussed not only in the Constitutional Convention, but also in the State ratifying conventions and in print. Oliver Ellsworth, Connecticut Convention, stated clearly: “This Constitution defines the extent of the powers of the general government. If the general legislature, Congress should at any time overleap their limits, if the United States go beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void”.

    I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. James Madison

    Our country and our Constitution have been under assault (to some degree), domestically, for decades. The progression of the attack has escalated over time to include a total disregard of the law of the land. Currently we have elected officials who have taken the Oath and then work against the protections the Constitution provides to the People. There are now those in Congress who have stretched and distorted the meaning of certain phrases of the “living document” so that they no longer resemble the written word.

    Some of you are old enough to remember hearing about this: “An evil exist that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protection and to protect our HOMELAND”. Adolph Hitler 1922

    Sound familiar?

    The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

    Congress of the United States
    begun and held at the City of New-York, on
    Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

    THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

    They should have been arrested and removed, held for prosecution )until we replace the domestic enemies within the judicial branch) a long time ago. WE will also need to have Bush, Cheney and that administration arrested also, held awaiting prosecution.

    It is time we bring America back under the US Constitution exactly as it is supposed to be, not as domestic enemies have “remade it”.

    POTUS Obama stated “the Constitution is a document of negative liberties.” How is he looking at the Constitution in order to have that opinion? The Bill of Rights is not a list of negative liberties to each of us, but a list of written restrictions upon the federal government. The Bill of Rights do not restrict US citizens, they limit what the politicians and bureaucrats can do to or against us. In order to view the Bill of Rights as “negative liberties”, Obama and his administration would have to be seeing them from how they stop what they can do to the people.

  68. 68
    Orville J. Shelton Says:

    This should have been started when the Speaker of the House at the time vented the current POTUS.

  69. 69
    BRYAN LONN Says:

    CONGRESS AND THE SENATE SHOULD ALL BE FIRED FOR THEIR WORK IN NDAA, AS WELL AS SOPA. STOP ALL THESE NON-PATRIOTS FROM RUNNING THIS COUNTRY! WE THE PEOPLE SAY, REMOVE THE MEMBERS!

  70. 70
    Ralph Lopez Says:

    Byron, you say: “Once again you have resorted to fear-mongering and misrepresented what the bill actually says regarding who can be detained under this bill by selectively taking a very small snippet (”any person”) from the bill. The bill actually describes precisely who can be detained under section 1021:

    You then cite the code:
    ————-

    (b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person
    under this section is any person as follows:

    (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed,
    or aided the terrorist attacks that
    occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored
    those responsible for those attacks.

    (2) A person who was a part of or substantially
    supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated
    forces that are engaged in hostilities
    against the United States or its coalition
    partners, including any person who
    has committed a belligerent act or has directly
    supported such hostilities in aid of
    such enemy forces.

    And again, under section 1022:

    (2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in
    paragraph (1) shall apply to any person
    whose detention is authorized under section
    1021 who is determined—

    (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda
    or an associated force that acts in coordination
    with or pursuant to the direction of al-
    Qaeda; and

    (B) to have participated in the course of
    planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
    attack against the United States or
    its coalition partners.

    Additionally, section 1022 has this stipulation in regards to the law’s applicability to American citizens:

    (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
    AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
    (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement
    to detain a person in military custody
    under this section does not extend to citizens
    of the United States.

    (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement
    to detain a person in military custody
    under this section does not extend to a lawful
    resident alien of the United States on the
    basis of conduct taking place within the
    United States, except to the extent permitted
    by the Constitution of the United
    States.

    Any fair reading of this code should tell you that far from being “precise,” this is a wide net which could include almost anyone, as Rep. McClintock said, “Would “substantial support” of an “associated force,” mean linking a web-site to a web-site that links to a web-site affiliated with al-Qaeda? We don’t know.”

    In addition, you have fallen for the “requirement” versus whether the law “allows” detention of US citizens ruse in Section 1022, which was Obama’s beef with the bill in that it cut in on his prerogatives.

    Section 1022 (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
    AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—

    (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement
    to detain a person in military custody
    under this section does not extend to citizens
    of the United States.

    This section says it is not “required” that US citizens be held in military detention, but it is certainly “allowed.” It is for this reason that Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) warned us that the language was “carefully crafted to mislead the public.” Grand Rapids Press here: http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/11/us_rep_justin_amash_opposes_de.html

    But even all this is completely irrelevant. You are forgetting that the accusations will rest solely on the word of the government, with no witnesses, evidence, or any other form of due process required. They could say you are al Qaeda and it could be a complete lie and you would have no way in the world to prove it. That you accept this and grant any government this level of trust is frankly un-American.

  71. 71
    mt Says:

    There can be no delay in stripping these dangerous and immoral traitors of their office in Congress – they need to be arrested and incarcerated asap before allowing acts of genocide to be committed against humanity by corporate psychopaths

    from Tues. Dec. 27, 2011
    America’s farmlands to be carpet-bombed with Vietnam-era Agent Orange chemical if Dow petition approved

    http://www.naturalnews.com/034500_Agent_Orange_Dow_2-4-D.html

  72. 72
    ALVIS JENKINS Says:

    I agree with you about the NDAA. However, I know you need financial help but it is not in my ability to donate. The only things I can donate will be me and my gun and any other sources to oppose tyranny from this Federal Government. My money tree that I once had died and there were no seeds to start another one. Everyone is asking for money these days and I live on a small SS check and a couple small funds. When it becomes time to revolt I will be ready even at age 69.

    Alvis Jenkins

  73. 73
    Ryan Bundy Says:

    Do you have a list of all those who voted in favor of this bill? I need to know which of the congressmen in my state supported it and which did not. I would like to see a national list.

  74. 74
    pt Says:

    The time for recalls or bringing charges of treason or sedition is past. The arrests should be happening now of all the traitors in Congress, along with all the known or suspected corporate psychopaths from the aforementioned corporation/s. The questions can be formed and answered later. Arrest these people now. Call on higher beings and or angels for their assistance in bringing these people down today.

  75. 75
    Christopher Mercon Says:

    This posts VERY poorly on Facebook. The way the title is structured, most of the title is not displayed. Why would anyone click on it when it doesn’t catch their interest?
    So, I’m not going to waste my time posting this in spite of it’s importance. Very poorly done.

  76. 76
    phillip Says:

    It’s very simple folks. A recall ins’t needed, rather use the all powerful (WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO) and the job is done!!! Simple as that.

    Respectfully in truth and liberty,

    Phillip Sandy OathKeeper, Defender of the Republic and One of the People of the Preammle.

  77. 77
    craig gamble Says:

    I submit my name to any petition for the use of removal any congressman or senator who vote for this.

  78. 78
    pt Says:

    This taking-back of our country can only happen one step at a time. First, we must arrest those we know can no longer (for whatever reason) represent their county. Lobbyists must go; they should be banded from Congressional proceedings once the arrests are made. We must be grateful to have 13 Senators and the 90+ Representatives to watch over our nation for now. Dear God, be with us.

  79. 79
    margot malpher Says:

    i am a voluntary security officer who has defended my country since 1964. i am a civilian and an american born national. i was devasted when i saw this bill pass the senate and i listened as senator merkle of oregon say to us that “what we have done here today” has to deprive the citizens of the most important right a speedy trial by jury. i agree. this bill does not offer any guarantees to us that any one of us is excluded as the justice system cannot or is incapable of weeding out who is and who is not an enemy combatant or terrorist. court officials and enforcement officers are not required to obey the constitution. yes they take the oath,but whose to enforce it? the problem really seems to be theres no great need by the citizenry to hold our officials accountable. why? because: “what can i do? i dont know how.” or “it doesn’t involve me” or “i dont want to go to jail ihave a family who depends on me” or i agree with you but i am but one person and my rep could care less and anyway i’m in the minority.” “theres no law.” and “yeah”. these are real quotes from people from many different states. the apathy is scary. what will it take to get americans up on their horses? perhaps its time for another martin luther king jr. and a march on washington , a leader like george washington, or time “to get out of dodge.” best to you all. margot who is fighting hard to get heard in the courts.

  80. 80
    Tom Sanders Says:

    What can we do to help ?

  81. 81
    escapefromobamastan Says:

    Since, by now, most know who committed 9/11, not al-qaeda, this law will probably work out very well in the near future.

    They also passed it because they know the American people have had it with them and we have lots and lots (and lots) of weapons.

  82. 82
    Shaggy Says:

    Since this post deals with “citizen detention”, it’s a good time to bring up the case of veteran Marty Atencio, who died while in custody of the Maricopa County Arizona sheriff’s department. Videos of the incident show that he was brutally beaten and tased. Not long ago, another Arizona veteran, Jose Guerena, was killed in a sheriff’s raid on his home. Oath Keepers was in the forefront of protests about Guerena’s death and should step up to demand answers about this second horrifying event.

  83. 83
    J.D. Keener Says:

    I am one of the co-founders of the Blount County Freedom Initiative. We are a 501c4 non-profit organization based in Oneonta, Alabama. I would like to join your effort to recall these traitorous Congressmen here in Alabama. I don’t know the steps I need to take to begin the process. Your guidance would be appreciated. If you can head me in the right direction, I will do the leg work involved with the effort. Please contact me at the e-mail listed above.

  84. 84
    Me99 Says:

    Oath Keepers might want to read the Constitution. There is no legal provision for recalling members of Congress. Each house of Congress is the sole judge of the qualifications of its members. That means no recall elections for federal officers. There’s an easy way to get rid of worthless members of Congress: Quit voting for them! Every representative and senator was voted into office, so why not vote them out next election day as the Constitution allows?

  85. 85
    Bryan Nelson Says:

    I found the response from the congressman interesting “persons covered by this Section may only be held until the end of hostilities. However, the administration has the authority to waive this requirement in the interests of national security.”

    Until the end of hostilities??? The “war” on terror could go on indefinitely. And then it basically says they can only hold you to the end of hostilities, but not really, because if you are a threat to national security, even that can be overridden.

    Scary. People need to realize that you only have to be accussed, not actually guilty, for all these requirements to apply.

  86. 86
    sam Says:

    These Congressional members who voted for the NDAA are CRIMINALS, and have violated their oath of office to the Constitution of the United States! Why the hell would we wait until the next lousy stinking election to get rid of them? Arrest them now! They are NOT above the laws of their land! They are a menace to the citizens of their country; they need to be removed from office now! Charge them with treason or seditious conspiracy or both!

  87. 87
    Anthony Says:

    I read this article of the Bill. I am kind of new at this. Doesn’t the below language protect American Citizens? As I said I am not famuiler with the ins and out of this Bill. I just
    became a member recently. Can anyone explain how this provision does not protect the constitution.
    Thank you.
    Anthony

    Additionally, section 1022 has this stipulation in regards to the law’s applicability to American citizens:

    (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
    AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
    (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement
    to detain a person in military custody
    under this section does not extend to citizens
    of the United States.
    (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement
    to detain a person in military custody
    under this section does not extend to a lawful
    resident alien of the United States on the
    basis of conduct taking place within the
    United States, except to the extent permitted
    by the Constitution of the United
    States.

  88. 88
    TS Says:

    ALVIS JENKINS, We are NOT revolting, we are Defending our US Constitution, our country, our freedoms from the domestic enemies within the three branches of our government.

    pt, The special interests and lobbyists have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician millions of dollars in cash. The POLITICIAN has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

    Since they are REQUIRED to take and to KEEP the Oath there is truthfully no real problem in removing them. They did not keep the Oath, they no longer meet the requirements of the office/position they currently occupy.

    Do all you Constitutional lawyers remember that if they do not keep the Oath, they become domestic enemies? That our Constitution, our country has been under “attack” by domestic enemies for decades. That domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution. Or are also those that support them.

    The wording of the Presidential Oath was established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure.

    “This Constitution defines the extent of the powers of the general government. If the general legislature, Congress should at any time overleap their limits, if the United States go beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void” means that anything that weakens or goes against the US Constitution is not legal, no matter what pretense of legality it got from domestic enemies in power. (Including the Federal Reserve – directly against the US Constitution = not legal, “void”, no valid, etc.)

    This and earlier attempts to take away our Rights as guaranteed by the Constitution as something our government cannot do is also illegal, void, not valid. The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” The Supreme Court of the United States

    As you can see, the Supreme Court attended to that very matter before we got a judicial branch filled with domestic enemies. Don’t make it more difficult then it is. If it goes against or weakens the US Constitution it is NOT legal, Not valid, not here in OUR country under the US Constitution.

  89. 89
    TS Says:

    Me99, This, all Three Branches of our Government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take an Oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity to get into the Office or Position they want; and they must keep that Oath until they leave office to be able to stay in that position. Once given, the Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge. This says that the moment they did NOT keep the Oath they no longer meet the requirement of the office or position they are currently occupying. This means we can have them arrested, remove them from office, and prosecute them.

    The first law statute of the United States of America, enacted in the first session of the First Congress on 1 June 1789, was Statute 1, Chapter 1: an act to regulate the time and manner of administering certain oaths, which established the oath required by civil and military officials to support the Constitution.
    The wording of the Presidential Oath (”… preserve, protect and defend the US Constitution”) was established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure.

    The Constitution was formed, among other purposes, to make the People’s liberties secure – secure not only against foreign attack but from oppression by the American People’s own government. Our forefathers set specific limits upon the national government and upon the States, and reserved to the People all powers that they did not grant. The Ninth Amendment declares: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

  90. 90
    Linda D. Perry Says:

    Hallelujiah! Where do I sign up to join OathKeepers? The politicians are GUILTY of TREASON and a clear and obvious CONSPIRACY to overthrow the United States government as we know it. Removing these traitors from office is a very nice start BUT that doesn’t go nearly far enough. They must be arrested and brought to the same trial that they so callously voted to deny ordinary American citizens. The Punishment for TREASON is death. Personally, I would have abosutely NO PROBLEM with them being sentenced to this well-deserved fate.

    However, it would be acceptable for these politicians to receive the exact same treatment that they so callously voted for American citizens. They could be shipped off to a foreign prison INDEFINTELY (until the war on Terror is over) and have absolutely no recourse to any protection from torture or from inhumane living conditions.

    Under no circumstances should we accept that they simply leave office in disgrace -OR- spend a year or two in a cushy “white collar” prison that is equipped with tennis courts and golf courses. NO WAY! They brought this to us and they deserve true JUSTICE.

    The biggest threat to the USA is not Iran or China. It’s our own homegrown TERRORIST politicians in Washington DC and their liberal judge cohorts. Enough is ENOUGH!

    Our government is no longer afraid of the people of the United States of America. We have to start jailing crooked politicians and crooked judges to correct this situation or there will no longer be a United States of America. People of America! Fight back!!!!

    You can start by picketing in front of your US Senator’s local office and publically accusing these politicians of being TERRORISTS and clear and present enemies of the USA. Demand that your County Sheriff arrest them as criminals!

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_18_00002381—-000-.html

  91. 91
    Karl Ferm Says:

    Now is the “Paul Revere moment” I stand proudly with All of You!

  92. 92
    Suzanne Says:

    Colorado is one of nine states with provisions that say that the right of recall extends to recalling members of its federal congressional delegation. Anyone in Colorado willing to join me in collecting signatures to recall Udall & Bennett?

  93. 93
    L Gore Says:

    “Time grows so short for action through knowledge.” Gyeorgos Ceres Hatonn

    “We call the IRS Regulations a “Code,” because a “Code” is a language always written in such a way that those who do not know the encryption and special meanings of the words, such as “Label”, cannot figure it out in a hundred years…” Pardon Me, but… #5 (Nord Davis. Jr.)

    The District of Columbia (The District) has created adhesion contracts (i.e. birth certificate, drivers license, voter registration, 1040), and has kept their true purpose a secret. All paper created by “The District” are contracts, they NEED a signature, this makes the signer “liable’ for “The District” debt.

    These “hidden” contracts are what make you “subject to” “The District’ rules and regulations as YOU just signed and made yourself surety http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surety.

    The Federal Reserve is an unconstitutional private company that our public servants (1913) put in charge of creating the country’s currency. The bankers got paid in gold, the public servants got the paper to spend and now didn’t have to go directly to the people.

    When the public servants ran out of gold they started using (and continue to use) “We the People” as collateral. (Research!!).

    The elected officials continue to allow the FED to exist. It makes it easier for them to spend other peoples’ money without being accountable.

    The collection arm of this private company (Federal Reserve) is the IRS. What, you think the bankers would trust the public servants with collection?
    The politicians will NEVER End the Fed! It is their sanctioned creation and useful cover. So what to do?

    Educate Yourself. Stop the transfusion, and DEFUND “The District”.

    Know the difference between “lawful” and “legal”. A population cannot be “ignorant and free”.
    The legal definitions of ’sui juris’, ‘propria persona’, and “pro se”, and what Contracts you have unwittingly signed.

    The sovereign States created the Federal District via the Constitution. Since the War and Emergency Powers Act of 1933 suspended the Constitution (Research!!)
    http://www.barefootsworld.net/war_ep.html – the states gave “The District” (the created) power over the States (the creator). The States have never reclaimed their sovereignty. http://www.allgov.com/Controversies/ViewNews/Illinois_Tries_to_Opt_Out_of_Federal_Deportation_Program_110511

    Know who you are “at Law”, that Contract Law is the ONLY law of the courts and get out from under “The District”.

  94. 94
    BJ Says:

    I sent a note to Senator Levin and McCain today and you can too. Below is the gist:
    Please consider recanting your position on the NDAA regarding indefinite military detention of Americans. Don’t tell me it does not apply to Americans. The language is so vague, Justice could easily interpret as such. You’ve done the dirty work of the administration and completely trashed our Bill of Rights. You need to be recalled, if not tried for outright treason sir. There will likely be a backlash on this issue in the latest NDAA, so I suggest you get in front of it. This is not a political issue this is basic human rights and a perversion of the power your constituents have granted you. Think big picture, you’ve just granted any sitting President to indefinitely detain you the next time you give a not so supportive speech about an administration. I can’t understand how any representative of the people would stand for this for a second. HIGH TREASON is what appears to have been committed here and Americans are waking up to it fast. The balance of power has swung way to far in favor of the executive, and Congress seems to love giving it more and more. Stand up for what is right sir. And to hide it in a military SPENDING bill and pass it under the radar around Christmas time is lower than low. You and all of the reps and Senators that supported this need to be recalled immediately. THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS IS THE ULTIMATE LAW OF THE LAND AND YOU HAVE DEFILED BOTH WITH THIS ACT! SHAME ON YOU SIR.

  95. 95
    gino986 Says:

    You may not “like” or care what happens to a 16 year old Denver citizen with a non-anglo name, but why no outcry about this?? Is HE guilty by association?? Is it wrong to be in “the wrong place”?

    By Craig Whitlock, Published: October 22
    “One week after a U.S. military airstrike (drone) killed a 16-year-old American citizen in Yemen, no one in the Obama administration, Pentagon or Congress has taken responsibility for his death, or even publicly acknowledged that it happened.
    The absence of official accountability for the demise of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a Denver native and the son of an al-Qaeda member, deepens the legal and ethical murkiness of the Obama administration’s campaign to kill alleged enemies of the state outside of traditional war zones…”

    Gino
    Vietnam combat disabled vet.

  96. 96
    Dave Short Says:

    I am an Oath keeper. My personal Oath includes NEVER FORGETTING THAT 911 Is a COMPLETE and TOTAL INSIDE JOB.

    Now, if I’m stopped by the police for any reason, I have to wonder if some well meaning but STUPID cop will check on my “Anti-government activities” since 911. There he can find a HUGE file of things put out all over the web every darn day for over 10 years.

    So, this well meaning local cop, would then be faced with a dilemma. Arrest me and turn me over as a potential terrorist (I’m not) to the Federal GOONS. On let me slide and possibly face a slower climb up the advancement ladder.

    Hopefully the cop is an Oath Keeper and we can salute eachother in respect and support, but more likely it’ll be one of these young roid head, weight lifting addicts who believe that we are “At war in the USA”.

    So, I guess if I want to go anywhere now, I have to exercise my Second Amendment right to Keep and BEAR arms.

    Don’t you think? What other way do we have of protecting ourselves from excesses by this out of control state apparatus now?

    This sucks so bad.

    Peace on earth, the Federal model doesn’t work.
    d

  97. 97
    Wasington76 Says:

    Bachmann Addresses Security Provisions in the Patriot Act. You must watch this.
    Then you must decide if she is for real, or establishment? The next two videos happened after her vote!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mos0blynBiI&fe...

    Front of the Guerena Residence
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR0d-85PEcI&fe...

    Secret Service Interrogates 7th Grader For Facebook Post, Without Parental Consent
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqSFbWtB_44&fe...

  98. 98
    Sandy Daniels Says:

    Why may I ask are we burning Rehburg at the stake while saying nothing against Baucus and Tester when Baucus was the original author of one of the most unconstitutional bill’s in the history of the USA? All three should be fired on the spot and replaced by serious and dedicated men who will refuse to sign up for the support of these treatises of Marxism and or socialism they call bills. We are betrayed from within by our leaders and without by those enemy’s of our country. I pray this is resolved without having to take direct action that will create an opportunity for invasion by other hostile nations and or the UN

  99. 99
    Ruth Dandrea Says:

    (Sec. 526) Requires an additional amount of funding to be used by the Secretary of the Navy to develop, in youths of ages 11 through 17, interest and skill in seamanship and aviation while molding strong character in an anti-drug and anti-gang environment in furtherance of national security objectives. Requires merit-based or competitive selection procedures to be used in the obligation or expenditure of such funds.
    This just dont sound right. Sounds like what the Nazis did with their children.

  100. 100
    sam Says:

    Writing things down on pieces of paper and petitioning known traitors to now change their stance on betraying their country and fellow citizens is useless AND mindless. Petitions have been done for years to no avail. These traitors are CRIMINALS; they have already incriminated themselves. We are well past the petitioning stage. The arrests need to happen asap. Charge them with treason or seditious conspiracy or both. We need our country back; get rid of these traitors who are taking our country DOWN! They MUST be stopped! All their plans are for the complete downfall of America! That is what a traitor does – they create the conditions for the fall of their country. How long will be allow them access to creating laws that do just that – take down America?

  101. 101
    h Says:

    Known traitor, Sen. R. Casey, PA, asks TSA to now pre-screen the elite, such as himself, while the plebeian masses can be forcibly undressed and groped at airports.

    “TSA Pre-Check offers eligible passengers, including members of Customs and Border Protection’s Trusted Traveler programs, the option of being pre-screened before arriving at airports. If TSA determines that a passenger qualifies for expedited screening, he or she will be referred to special security lanes where removal of shoes, belts, jackets, and certain electronic devices and liquid items will not be required. This will help to minimize airport delays and inconvenience to travelers while ensuring the effectiveness of the TSA’s critical security screening processes and our national security”.
    letter to TSA sent by Casey Dec. 21, 2011
    http://casey.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=557c031d-733b-491a-a8f9-a1d6ec33fd6e

  102. 102
    Penny Worth Says:

    Downsize DC has picked up this ball as well.They encouraged writing to your Con-gress person and informing them: You do not consent to such tyrannical action, and you will remember in November. I sure will be encouraging folks to vote third party if they have to to get this un-Constitutional, anti-Bill of Rights oppressive law off the books.

    From Statists, tyrants, and ignorance, Lord assist us in delivering ourselves!

  103. 103
    Jacob Krygoski Says:

    There are much cheaper ways of removing them from office

  104. 104
    Js Says:

    19 states have the power to recall: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16581
    How can the other 18 states begin their process?
    Also, here’s a petition to sign, “Tell Congress, NDAA Approval is Treason” http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-congress-ndaa-approval-is-treason
    Can the “two witnesses to the same overt act” be one if the senators who voted “nay”?

  105. 105
    gt Says:

    History repeats itself.
    “Does US Senate Commit Treason with NDAA Bill?
    …European law which granted similar powers…
    Senators Graham, Levin, McCain and Congressman McKeon–along with the US Senate and House of Representatives are in ‘good company’with other alleged ‘republics’—mandating the suspension of civil liberties in the name of national security. In part of what is now called the EU– another law advocating indefinite detention of alleged terrorists while simultaneously nullifying a person’s civil rights to a trial was similarly defended. Corporate manufacturers of military armaments and military supplies used this law to guarantee continued profits through a similar use of continued war.
    The name of the law was ‘ The Notverordnung zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Decree For the Protection of People and State) . The principle architect of this law was Reich President von Hindenburg– under the dictate of Adolf Hitler.”
    http://www.unitedprogressives.org/pages/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1276:does-us-senate-commit-treason-with-ndaa-bill-&catid=346:jeanine-molloff&Itemid=126

  106. 106
    Ben Monteith Says:

    I will spread the bad news. I will give you all the support that I can muster. We all need to drop to our knees and pray to Almighty GOD for our country.

  107. 107
    TripWire Says:

    I have started a letter writing campaign to gather support for recalling Rep.Mike Rogers(R-MI). Both of Michigans Senators are hard core Libs, so its no suprise that they voted for the NDAA, but now we have supposed conservatives voting against freedom and the Bill of Rights. If only a few of us are successful we can set the tone that we aren’t to be trifled with and that even one vote against freedom is a vote that might kill their political future, which is how true representation should work.

  108. 108
    montanabecki Says:

    Here’s a bill that hasn’t drawn much attention but was introduced in the Senate on October 12, 2011 and was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:s1698:

    Its purpose is “To add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.” Here is the current law on this matter: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1481.html

    You will notice S. 1698 seeks to add certain language which reiterates the NDAA’s language in Sec. 1031:
    (C) by adding at the end the following:

    `(8) engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States.’; and

    (2) by adding at the end the following:

    `(c) For purposes of this section, the term `hostilities’ means any conflict subject to the laws of war.’.
    My conclusion is that between the two “laws” they could strip you of your citizenship and then cart you off to a detention center ANYWHERE in the world (can we say Gitmo?) because YOU WOULD NO LONGER BE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN! All subject to their ambiguous language, the meaning of which is to be determined by them alone…
    WILL ALL THE PEOPLE WHO CLAIM THAT IT **DOESN’T** PERTAIN TO U.S. CITIZENS SO IT’S NOT A THREAT **PLEASE WAKE UP!!** THAT WILL BE IRRELEVANT TO THEIR PURPOSE!!! ALL THEY WILL HAVE TO DO IS STRIP YOU OF YOUR CITIZENSHIP!! AND THIS CAN HAPPEN TO **ANYONE** IF S.1698 PASSES!! THIS BILL ALSO NEEDS “WE THE PEOPLE” TO STAND UP AND SAY, “NO!”

  109. 109
    Thomas Smith Says:

    I reside is the great State of Alaska and contacted my Senators and Congressman on my concerns of this Bill as well. This is the response I got

    Dear Thomas:

    Thank you for contacting me about detention provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (H.R. 1540). I appreciate hearing from you and having the opportunity to respond.

    America is a nation of checks and balances, and it remains so under this bill. Nothing in the bill allows any branch of the military to detain a law-abiding American citizen if you go to the local gun store or grocery store. The bill does not overturn the Posse Comitatus Act; the military will not be patrolling the streets. This bill does not take away your rights as a citizen or lawful permanent resident; the authority under this act does not take away one’s habeas rights. Furthermore, the bill does not take away an individual’s rights to equal protection under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and does not take away one’s due process rights afforded under the 5th or 14th Amendments. If the bill did such a thing, I would, without question, oppose it.

    On December 15, the Senate approved the National Defense Authorization Act conference report on a bipartisan vote of 86-13. The conference report includes two provisions regarding the U.S. government’s detention authority that have raised many questions.

    Section 1021 of H.R. 1540 affirms that the President has permissive authority to detain “covered persons,” and specifies that “covered persons” are limited to persons “who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks” or persons who were “a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.” In addition to limiting the persons covered by this provision to those involved in the September 11, 2001 attacks and those associated with al-Qaeda or the Taliban, Section 1021 explicitly provides that nothing in this section “is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force” or “shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”

    Section 1022 of H.R. 1540 requires our Armed Forces to hold a person in military custody if the person is captured in the course of hostilities and is “determined to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda and to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.” However, Section 1022 provides an important exception to this requirement to detain members of al-Qaeda. The President may waive the requirement by submitting a certification that the waiver is in the national security interest of the United States. In addition, the requirement to detain a member of al-Qaeda in military custody under section 1022 “does not extend to citizens of the United States,” or “a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution.”

    Again, thank you for contacting me.

    United States Senator
    Lisa Murkowski
    http://murkowski.senate.gov*

  110. 110
    Sandy Monroe Says:

    I am thrilled that you are launching a response to this attack on our liberties. I was wondering, however, why this attack does not also include the president who signed this into law as well as the House and Senate. Anyone and everyone who signed needs to be removed from office. I am also in agreement with many who have written here that not only do they need to be removed from office, they need to be tried for treason as well.

    Why is OathKeepers NOT including the president in this effort – he is as guilty as the rest and should not be ignored in this effort.

    Please reconsider and go after EVERYONE that is involved, including the president.

  111. 111
    Deb Says:

    I fired my state senator Pat Toomey who voted for the NDAA. May be a good start to fire them through their website. Copy below.

    I am firing you as my Senator as you have broken your oath by voting for NDAA:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[3]

    “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear”.

    - Marcus Tullius Cicero

    I am voting for RON PAUL. A true Statesman!

    God Bless you all and many thanks for your commitment to the people.

    Deb

  112. 112
    Steven Mailer Says:

    Thank god for you, it’s time someone stood up. But my friends I fear that simply asking for an arrest will not solve anything you want change? You gotta pull a soviet russia, you gotta march on the white house, the congress places you have to [word deleted by Elias Alias] these people.

    The MOST important thing to them is power, pure raw unlimited power, ANYONE who stands in their way gets shot, they WILL come for you, you people have to protect your families your loved ones, yourselves you are good people and you have my absolute respect but it’s time to take the fight to the enemy and as much as a lot of you won’t like to admit it, your government has BECOME the enemy.

    I won’t conceal this fact, I am NOT American I’m Scottish but the woman I love is living in the states and is openly against this bill and the current system of govt that makes it’s fortune by trampling the working man. I write to you people mainly for her benefit..that and I cannot watch another holocaust. Please I beg of you, keep fighting the good fight, never surrender and please understand that these…MONSTERS have to be destroyed. After-all you executed Bundy didn’t you?

  113. 113
    Bruce Says:

    OCCUPY (Seize And DESISTANCE of) DEMisrepubilkans ALL!

  114. 114
    Terry Says:

    Let’s see if you post desenting opinions as well as your Fox friends opinions. Your argument is about the freedoms our Constitution affords us. Is Freedom of speech included, or just when it suits your opinion?

    [Note from Elias Alias, editor: I have deleted one of your posts. My policy is to delete biased ignorance (on grounds of redundancy) and any post marked by malicious stupidity. This site is Oath Keepers' property and you have no 'rights' here. Oath Keepers owes you nothing, but you owe Oath Keepers a degree of respect, as you are a guest here on our site. If you want to speak your mind by insulting Oath Keepers, you'll have to find another place which will tolerate your level of mentality.]

  115. 115
    Reggie Says:

    We need to start a petition for resignation for any legislator who voted for this act. Have it at every party caucus and election voting precinct. For any citizen who wants to sign it then impeach them.

  116. 116
    Deb Says:

    Here is a bill trying to stop it.
    http://theintelhub.com/2011/12/24/last-hope-rep-landry-introduces-amendment-to-ndaa-to-protect-americans-from-indefinite-detention-without-due-process/

  117. 117
    chiller Says:

    Both Virginia Senators Warner and Webb voted for NDAA. How can I help in effort to recall these traitors?

  118. 118
    Johnny Wheeloock Says:

    Obviously, Washington is threatening the world not merely with war but also with inflation.

  119. 119
    Johnny Wheeloock Says:

    When our dollar weakens the prices goes up, just look at the price of gas, food, travel, almost everything we need or do deepens on the dollar.
    Here is a Quote by- Edward A. Evans
    “Since 2002, the U.S. dollar has fallen or weakened by as much as 35 percent against the European euro and 24 percent against the Japanese yen (Chipello 2004; Sanger, 2005). The weakening U.S. dollar is very much talked about,

  120. 120
    Fred Perry Says:

    I pulled up this spending bill and looked up the sections is question. Section 1021 & 1022 seem to specifically exclude citizens and legal resident aliens. Am I missing something?

  121. 121
    Buddi Says:

    Please post step-by-step instructions for launching a recall effort in those states with laws that allow it,.

    Perhaps more importantly, step-by-step instructions for instituting impeachment proceedings for those states without recall laws.

  122. 122
    Buddi Says:

    As a follow-on to my prior comment, I found a website with detailed instructions on how citizens can initiate impeachment petitions (for those of us in states that do not have laws on the books allowing us to recall our federal representatives): http://impeachforpeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

    Since Deb in comment 114 posted about an amendment to the NDAA providing enhanced protections for US citizens; I am going to urge my NC officials to support that amendment. Those who voted for NDAA who do not support the amendment will be the subject of my own DIY impeachent submissions.

  123. 123
    unimportant person Says:

    Do we have a citizenry capable of making these distinctions about the NDAA and other, likewise, Constitution-killing acts of Congress? The Pentagon has spent decades learning-implementing procedures on how to slow-kill the American mind. Television is a slow-killing device, which imparts mind control programming to all social-economic-generational factions in the United States and beyond. In whatever form, whether it is “News” or “entertainment” or something specifically-meant for children, like cartoons, or children’s movies, or “family”-directed animated films, or even something seemingly “untouchable” like the age-old “60 Minutes” program, there is some level of mind-manipulation at the heart of the presentation. The goal is to dumb-down the population, first and foremost, because that makes their massive manipulation all the more potent. Have they already won? Here we have a watershed moment. Long-protected American liberties and basic freedoms have been outlawed by a band of powerful legislators and one American President. Is it possible for an honest and reasonable message to penetrate through the din of daily propoganda-noise? I guess we are about to find out. Because the NDAA is a declaration of war against Liberty & Freedom.

  124. 124
    Elias Alias Says:

    To Fred Perry @#118 on January 02, 2012, at 6:25pm:

    Fred, yes, you are missing something. Please forgive me for taking so long to draw up a statement which will reveal the deliberately-obfuscated language which hides the onerous intent behind this bill. I’m almost done with writing this up for readers here, and when done I will post it as a separate article on our front page.

    In the meantime please take a viewing of this video in which your question is examined in depth by people who have seen through the deception embodied in the language of the bill.

    http://youtu.be/YEr9oxGVAwo

    Thanks, Fred.
    Salute!
    Elias Alias

  125. 125
    BRETT Says:

    I TRUST…

    - OATHKEEPERs WILL KEEP THIS AT THE FOREFRONT OF ITs VERY EXISTENCE!

    Freedom issues will arise daily thru 2012, relentlessly. But NONE r, nor will be as critical, as important to ALL OF US – as this NDAA.

    “OATHKEEPERS” doesnt even realize how critically-important to “OATHKEEPERs” this Treasonus BILL is!

  126. 126
    Karl Heck Says:

    The Unconstitutional passage and signing into “ILLEGAL” law of S.B.1867 on 31 Dec 2011 was the final nail in freedom’s coffin…….UNLESS WE OBEY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS and RETAKE OUR OCCUPATIONAL GOV’T BACK FROM THE TREASONOUS VIPERS who now control it.

    Article 1 sec.9 clause 2 of the U.S.CONSTITUTION 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. [emphasis KH]

    Clearly nothing even remotely close to this has occurred. THIS IS AN ABOLISHING of THE U.S CONSTITUTION and A BLATANT DECLARATION OF WAR BY THE FEDERAL GOV’T on its CITIZENS.

    Adolf Hitler enacted an identical law when “TERRORISTS” burnt the Reichstag. (German government office building) The next day 28 Feb 1933 to ALLOW THE GERMAN GOV’T TO EFFECTIVELY FIGHT TERRORISTS and PROTECT THE STATE and GERMAN PEOPLES the “REICHSTAGSBRANDVERORDNUNG” or Decree of the Reich’s President For The Protection of People and State was passed, effectively eliminating the German Peoples’ Civil Rights under the Weimar Govt’s Constitution.

    TO PROTECT THEM HE NEEDED TO STRIP THEM OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION AGAINST ILLEGAL SEARCH, SEIZURE, IMPRISONMENT, TORTURE, EXECUTION!

    SOUND FAMILIAR?

  127. 127
    Wasington76 Says:

    Agenda 21 a view into what we witnessing today.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM

  128. 128
    Olivia Kaho Says:

    I feel as strongly about the unconstitutional nature of NDaa as most commenting on this post. However, what I wish to remind my fellow citizens (I’m not a “Patriot”, I do not believe in such arbitrary definitions of my humanity)is that many of you have defended our country during times of prior treasonous administrations and their policies. My country (the USA)is guilty of a multitude of criminal invasions and illegal seizure of property in the middle east and elsewhere to bolster its world geo-political dominance. I remind those who stood by, even rallied behind, “The Patriot Act” to consider wethere the current trend of Obama-bashing (hey, I’m disappointed in the guy too) and paranoia is not simply reactionary and, if not, will you reconsider your support of the treasonous Bush Administration? A War pig is a pig wether on the left or right. CAPITALISM DOES NOT EQUAL DEMOCRACY, and I assure you that President Obama is not a Marxist. I am pretty sure there are ver few Marxists, and those of us who so identify tend to be very academic and use our worldview to analyze literary and cultural texts. I could not name a single Marxist active in politics in the US today. Civil liberties are violated by totalitarian regimes of ANY AND ALL ideologies, including those who identify as Marxist of course. But most of what passes for “communism” in geo-politics is state-totalitarian CAPITALISM. There are more examples of social democracy that work effectively than there are of effective democracies in unregulated capitalist societies. Our most recent crisis is due to Reagan era deregulation, NOT due to “socialist practices” such as capital gains taxes and/or social programs for the very poor.

  129. 129
    Alan Says:

    It is interesting that this issue is shared by the Oath Keepers and the Occupy Movement. I thought that it was shameful that the Oath Keepers were silent when peaceful Occupy protesters were detained and the press suppressed on the streets of America. Wall Street swindlers stole trillions from most of our retirement accounts and no one went to prison and kids trying to point this out are being Pepper Sprayed and arrested. to the police, your retirement accounts were raided too. Rise up, join us and lets get back to the Constitution.

  130. 130
    Scott Baier Says:

    Hello,

    I sent an E-mail to one of my U.S. Senators here in Florida, Marco Rubio, and told him that he committed treason by signing NDAA 2012. His response is below. I would appreciated some pointers before I respond.
    Dear Mr. Baier,

    Thank you for writing me in regard to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA). I understand some provisions in this bill are contentious and I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

    As you may know, every year the Senate Armed Services Committee presents the NDAA, which authorizes appropriations for the corresponding fiscal year, to the full Senate for consideration. The Senate passed this year’s Defense Authorization Act on December 1, 2011, and following a conference committee with the House, the final version of the NDAA was passed by the Senate on December 15, 2011, by a vote 86 to 13.

    I am aware this bill contains some controversial provisions related to terrorist detainees, and whether they should be held in military or civilian law enforcement custody. In particular, I am referring to Sections 1031, 1032 and 1033 of the Senate version of the NDAA. This legislation reiterates that in times of war the Armed Forces have the authority to detain terrorists in the United States if they are members of Al Qaeda or a group affiliated with Al Qaeda and/or assisted in the planning and execution of the September 11th terror attacks. During the Senate debate on the NDAA, Senator Mark Udall (CO) introduced an amendment which would have struck this language from the bill.

    I voted against the Udall amendment and in favor of compromise language which states that the President already has the authority to detain individuals associated with Al Qaeda or other terror groups regardless of their citizenship. The Udall amendment failed by a vote of 37 to 61, however, the compromise language passed 99 to 1 and is contained in the final NDAA which does not change current law with regard to U.S. citizen’s rights. To be clear, this NDAA does not change the Posse Comitatus Act, nor does it take away an individual’s habeas corpus rights. Additionally, the language in the NDAA does not take away an individual’s rights to equal protection under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, nor does it take away one’s due process rights afforded under the 5th or 14th Amendments. If this bill did such a thing, I would strongly oppose it.

    I believe an act of terror against the United States is an act of war, and I believe those who commit such acts of terror should be treated as enemy combatants not as common criminals. When enemy combatants who wish to harm United States citizens are captured, the rights of these detainees are restricted to basic human rights. All detainees held by the United States are treated with dignity and respect, despite the heinous crimes they have been accused of committing against our nation. I will continue to support a detention policy that protects the United States, as well as the rights of our law abiding citizens.

    It is an honor and a privilege to serve you as your United States Senator. Thank you for sharing your views with me. If I can be of any help to you with regard to this issue or any other concerns of yours, please do not hesitate to contact me.

  131. 131
    Roger L. Meyer Says:

    Why is our Congress even hesitating a millisecond in not only impeaching Obama and his hand-picked Supreme Court representaties, but jailing them on charges of High
    Treason during a time of national crises (i.e. terrorist attacks, illegal immigration, drug trafficking accross the Mexican border, Operation Fast and Furious, etc.).

    If any ordinary citizen committed even one of these crimes they would spend the rest of their lives behind Federal prison bars.

  132. 132
    Roger L. Meyer Says:

    To Olivia Kayho:

    You are correct. Many of us have fought in far away places only to come home and be spit upon and have cow’s blood thrown on us by people of your convictions.

    I believe that you have the right to your opinion, but if you truly think that poorly of the United States, you would surely be welcomed in Iran or Iraq or even North Vietnam. Why don’t you go there and see how nice it is?

  133. 133
    REPUBLIC RED Says:

    YES! PLEASE TELL US WHAT TO DO AND HOW WE CAN GET YOU TO COME WITH US TO OUR REPRESENTATIVES OFFICES TO HAVE THEM REMOVED!

    THIS IS AN ACT OF WAR AGAINST US, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE! WE WILL NOT AND SHOULD NOT ALLOW SUCH A GROSS VIOLATION OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS! HOW DARE GOVERNMENT DO THIS! THIS IS TREASON!

    THIS IS NOT NAZI GERMANY–THIS IS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

    AND WE MUST PROTECT OUR BEAUTIFUL REPUBLIC!

    THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS WERE PUT INTO PLACE BY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS TO ENSURE WE WOULD NEVER HAVE TO ENDURE TYRANNY AGAIN! WE CANNOT SIT STILL–WE MUST FIGHT THIS!!

  134. 134
    cole roberts Says:

    When we break the law we are arrested, when politicians break the the law they recieve no punishment. What happened to NOBODY is above the law? These criminals should be arrested at the least and at best be hung for treason. The problem is that our sheriffs, who hold the power to arrest and detain these crimnals, have also been corrupted. Without the power of your local sheriff to arrest these traitors NOTHING else will matter. Start with your local sheriff, if he has not spoken out in public against the NDAA then he has to be replaced first. The time for begging your elected officals to do the right thing and worthless threats, like the “armed rally’s, is long past. Bottom line is that senators, governors or sheriff’s can’t and wont solve the problem because the fault lies wth US, we the people that have no guts and lack the spine and love of liberty that our forefathers had. All is lost unless the WE THE PEOPLE realize that we have the power but must be willing to exercise that power.

  135. 135
    Gregory Thomas Says:

    Mitt should be among those hung for treason…not the next President… http://www.prisonplanet.com/romney-would-sign-ndaa.html…

  136. 136
    John Sutton Says:

    WHO VOTED FOR THE NDAA BILL? WE NEED NAMES. THESE PEOPLE MUST BE VOTED OUT.

    BY THE WAY, in MARBURRY V. MADISON, CHIEF JUSTICE of the Supreme Court MARSHALL SAID THAT ANY “LAW” THAT IS NOT IN ACCORD WITH THE CONSTITUTION IS NULL! (i.e., not in fact a law, and is not to be enforced, and any police officer who tries to enforce such a “law” is violating the Constitution….Cops beware!!!!) And that pertains to all the IRS enforcers who are enforcing the unconstitutional tax laws as well. NOTE: we are constantly at war, and during war time there is something called TREASON to be concerned about. Hint.

  137. 137
    Doug Richerson Says:

    http://www.change.org/petitions/sponsors-of-msnbc-cnn-news-and-fox-news-stop-the-media-blackout-of-ron-paul

  138. 138
    Carla Giampaglia Says:

    Initially, this document may seem boring and irrelevant to this topic, but as you read it, you will (or should, cure you’re a smart bunch here) grasp the complete implications of this information.
    Personally, it’s something that EVERY AMERICAN needs to read and learn. This could be our out against this illegal sham of a gov’t and the impostor in chief.

    Let me preface this link by saying that someone challenged me to look up the reason why our names are capitalized on our birth certs, drivers license and any and all legal or gov’t docs, etc. Go look at your documents…

    http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/Articles/MemLawOnTheName.htm

  139. 139
    Josey Wales Says:

    This is a head-up for all my brothers.They keep coming at us. “Red Flag” Feds To Train Cops On How To Deal With “Mentally ILL” Veterans: Attention OathKeepers Beware http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/1686/882

  140. 140
    Donny Williams Says:

    Why does no one respond to Byrone Williams? He posted on December 27th at 1235 explaining the exact wording of the NDAA bill. It says clearly in the bill that citizens of the US won’t be held under this bill unless they actually aide Al Qaeda or some other military organization. Why does everyone have selective hearing and vision. This is blatantly designed to fight terrorism and people who aide terrorists in general. I’ve yet to see anyone on here have a legitimate response to his explanation. He posted to bill itself, doesn’t read like a “civil rights” violation to me. Sounds to me like you guys want people who support terrorists to be free as long as they are “citizens”.

  141. 141
    Elias Alias Says:

    In response to Donny Williams at comment# 138 of January 29, 2012 -
    -

    Donny Williams said:
    “Why does no one respond to Byrone Williams? He posted on December 27th at 1235 explaining the exact wording of the NDAA bill. It says clearly in the bill that citizens of the US won’t be held under this bill unless they actually aide Al Qaeda or some other military organization. Why does everyone have selective hearing and vision. This is blatantly designed to fight terrorism and people who aide terrorists in general. I’ve yet to see anyone on here have a legitimate response to his explanation. He posted to bill itself, doesn’t read like a “civil rights” violation to me. Sounds to me like you guys want people who support terrorists to be free as long as they are ‘citizens’.”
    -

    Elias Alias in reply:

    Donny, it is because Mr. Williams is wrong. I have been curious to see how many people fall for the trickery embodied in the language of this bill. Anyone who has been reading at this site can, if one really wants to see this, come to understand why Byrone Williams and others have misunderstood it.

    What I recommend for you is that you quit drinking the Fedgov’s cool-aid and take time to read the truth about NDAA 2012 for yourself. You say that the bill states “citizens of the US won’t be held under this bill unless they actually aide Al Qaeda or some other military organization.”
    And yes, it’s true, that the bill does more-or-less say that. But what Byrone and you haven’t done yet is read deeply enough into this problem. You should start by noticing first that the Constitution says lots of things which today’s Federal government totally defies, such as the requirement that the U.S. Congress declare war before sending in the Marines. Has the Congress declared war since WWII? No, it has not. Yet we’ve had Korea, Vietnam, two Iraq wars and a ten-years-old Afghanistan war, none of which were declared by Congress. Every one of those wars have been illegal/unlawful wars because Congress did not declare war on either of those countries before we sent in invading troops. You cannot deny that, and that goes to the heart of the matter about the wording in the NDAA-2012.

    A closer reading of the bill will show you how the traitors who wrote it conspired to deceive the average American. There are several previous bills which come into play, without being named by this bill. The Authorization for Use of Military Force; the USA PATRIOT ACT; the Military Commissions Act, among others – such Acts paved the way for tyranny, and the NDAA-2012 fortifies that direction. It is much deeper than just that, but that is the proper perspective in which to begin your study into the NDAA-2012 and its ominous implications. It is sad, but true, that some of our people in Congress will flat-out lie to the people. They have worded this abomination in ways meant to deceive honest Americans while putting the noose of tyranny around our necks.I do recommend that you slowly read the article above one more time please.

    After reading the above article again, more carefully this time, here is another good article which exposes the treachery –

    http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2012/01/19/what-congress-must-do-to-fix-the-damage-of-ndaa-and-deny-the-u-s-government-the-power-to-wage-war-on-americans/

    Salute!
    Elias

  142. 142
    Bob Says:

    I commend you folk for keeping your Oath. I’m a young Canadian man and I respect the truth for it and your Constitution. Regardless that I am your Northern Brother, I believe in it too, and granted what I know about what’s coming within the U.S.- I’m well affirmed the greater people in your country will comee out stronger than ever. Hold true, continue your valiant courageous fight, and keep my Southern Brothers and Sisters safe from any Powers that Were; either foreign or domestic.

  143. 143
    Stewart Rhodes Says:

    email us at memberships@oathkeepers.org and we will put you in touch with someone on the phone. Not sure where you have been leaving messages, but try that email. Maybe you just don’t know how to use the CONTACT button, but hey, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. Email us. But no, this is not some scam. We are just damn busy trying to save our country. Stewart

Leave a Reply

© 2012 www.oathkeepers.org | Oath Keepers Corp Address: 5130 S. Fort Apache Rd - Las Vegas, NV 89148