January 19th, 2012

What Congress Must Do to Fix the Damage of NDAA, and Deny the U.S. Government the Power to Wage War on Americans


There are  members of Congress now moving to repeal Section 1021 of the NDAA of 2012.  While a good start, simple repeal of the NDAA is not enough to undo the damage that has been done to our liberty, as I will explain below.   Congress needs to go a step farther and clearly state, in writing, that it does not authorize the use of military force, military detention, or military trial on U.S. citizens or lawful residents.   And it should go even farther and clearly prohibit any such use of the war powers on Americans.  Congress needs to slam that door shut.

What Congress Must Now Do to Fix This:

Right now, the President can claim that Congress has authorized him to use war powers and the laws of war against the American people, to kill them, detain them indefinitely, or to try them for pretended offenses against the laws of war.   To remove that supposed power, and stop it from being used on Americans, Congress MUST do the following:

  1. Repeal.  Repeal Section 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA, or at least amend it to clearly state that nothing therein applies to U.S. citizens or lawful residents.  Frankly, it should have been considered as a stand alone bill, so a total repeal may be best, so they can hold actual hearings on how Congress wants to handle detainees, but in either case, wipe out any application to US citizens or lawful residents.
  2. Deny authorization. Congress must clearly state that it does not authorize the President to use military force, military detention, or military trial against US citizens or lawful residents (and amend current laws, including the NDAA as needed to be consistent with that clear statement that Congress does not give such authorization).    Congress may need to say that any prior authorization, including within the 2001 AUMF, whether express or implied,  is hereby withdrawn, or state that Congress now clarifies that it did not intend such authorization in 2001. Whatever works best to make it bulletproof and not open to interpretation by any court as Congress giving authorization.
  3. Prohibit use of the laws of war against Americans.  Clearly prohibit the use of military force, military detention, or military trial (except as to those Americans serving in the Armed forces) against any US citizen or lawful resident for any crime whatsoever, including any alleged violations of the laws of war.
  4. Mandate a trial for Treason, before a jury. Congress must clearly mandate that a US citizen or lawful resident who is suspected, accused, or even “determined” to be levying war against the United States, or committing any belligerent act, or to be aiding and abetting the enemy, must be indicted by a Grand Jury, pursuant to the 5th Amendment, for the crime of treason and must be tried for treason, before a jury of their peers (as required by Article III, Section 2 and by the 6th Amendment), in a civilian court, with a requirement of two witnesses to the same overt act or confession in open court before conviction, as required by Article III, Section 3.

I will explain further below why all this is necessary, but the over-arching point is that Congress must not just say it does not give authorization.  It must also say a President cannot use military.  It is necessary for Congress to place the President at his lowest claimed war powers when it comes to US citizens and lawful residents, by not just withdrawing Congressional authorization for the use of war powers on US citizens, but by clearly prohibiting it.  Now, Obama would be forced to argue to a court that he has an independent power, as Commander in Chief, to use war powers on US citizens even in the face of a clear congressional prohibition against such use of war powers.

The reason that is necessary for Congress to go beyond merely repealing Section 1021 of the NDAA of 2012  is that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) of 2001 has already, long before the NDAA of 2012, been interpreted by both the Executive branch and by the federal courts as authorizing use of military force and detention (and even arguably use of military tribunal) against US citizens.  The key case is the 2004 Hamdi decision, where the Supreme Court interpreted the 2001 AUMF as having authorized not just the use of force, but also military detention against U.S. citizens.   While the Court did not directly address military trial, the case it relied upon, Ex Parte Quirin (1942) involved an American citizen being tried by military tribunal, and when the Hamdi Court ruled that the US government can designate one of its own citizens as an unlawful combatant, that opened the door to the full spectrum of military power under the laws of war to be used against Americans.   In wartime, the President, as Commander in Chief, can do the following to an enemy:

THE POWERS OF WAR, Include the Power to:

  1. Kill.  Use of Military force.  An enemy in wartime can be shot on sight, bombed, killed by missile, sniper bullet, etc.  And that enemy does not even have to be bearing arms.  The radio operator and mail clerk is as vulnerable to being killed as is the infantryman.  All are military assets and fair game.
  2. Capture.  Use of Military detention
  3. Trial by military commission or tribunal for violation of the laws of war.   Among the offenses against the law of war are: Not wearing a uniform or an insignia recognizable at a distance; not serving in a recognizable chain of command; not bearing arms openly.  These “violations” have obvious problems when applied to US citizens here in the U.S. – imagine an American with a concealed carry permit being charged with violation of the laws of war for not bearing arms openly.  It is an absurdity that is possible when the laws of war are applied to Americans.  Though the Hamdi court did not have to rule about the lawfulness of such a trial, remember that the Ex Parte Quirin case from 1942 that serves as the basis for all of this  involved a military tribunal being used against a US citizen.

The dangerous error of Supreme Court, first in the Quirin case, and again in the Hamdi case,  was in finding that such war powers can be used by the US government against its own people.  That is spectacularly in error.

Under the Constitution, any American citizen or lawful resident accused of waging war against the United States or aiding the enemy MUST be tried for treason before life or liberty can be taken from them, as Justice Scalia pointed out in his dissent in Hamdi.

U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2, Clause 3, states:

“The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.”

the U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 3 states:

“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.”

The U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2, Clause 3, and Article III, Section 3 together clearly and plainly set forth what manner of trial must be used against a United States Citizen or lawful resident who is alleged to have waged war against the United States or to have aided the enemy in wartime – requiring a trial by a jury of their peers, in an Article III, civilian court, for the crime of Treason, with the extra evidentiary burden of two witnesses to the same overt act, or confession in open court.  Nothing could be more plain and obvious.

And yet, the federal courts have willfully ignored the Treason Clause, and also have willfully ignored the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments, pretending that the law of war can be used to circumvent all of those plain commands.

And even before the NDAA of 2012, two presidents have used war powers against US citizens.  The Bush administration detained two US citizens in military detention, Yasir Hamdi, and Jose Padilla.  Obama has begun to kill US citizens he has determined are unlawful belligerents).  So, the first two war powers, the power to kill, and the power to capture and detain have already been used by presidents and the US military against Americans.  And all based on the 2001 AUMF (or on a claim that the President can use such powers even without congressional authorization).

And that is why the boilerplate language in the NDAA Section 1021 that nothing herein shall be construed to expand the powers of the President does nothing – the Court has already interpreted the 2001 AUMF as authorizing the President to use military force and detention against US citizens suspected of being unlawful belligerents.

Likewise, the boilerplate that nothing herein shall be construed to change  the current law and authorities regarding detention of US citizens also does nothing to stop detention, because, again, the 2001 AUMF had already been interpreted as allowing for military detention of US citizens, with the Supreme Court, in Hamdi, also erroneously ruling that nothing in our Constitution prevents the US government from designating one of its own citizens as an unlawful combatant (same as an unlawful belligerent).

So, what did Congress do in the NDAA of 2012?

1.  Congress affirmed that yes, the Executive branch and the federal courts were correct to infer that the 2001 AUMF authorized not just military force, but also detention, and even trial.  Now Congress has made it very clear, in writing, that this was their intent back in 2001.  Where the 2001 AUMF contains no written authorization to use military detention and trial, and those powers were only inferred, the NDAA does contain that express, clear, written authorization to use:

1)      Military detention without trial for the duration of the conflict

2)      Trial by military commission, for supposed violations of the laws of war

3)      Rendition.  Turning “covered persons” over to a foreign country or to a foreign entity.

(in addition to authorizing the use of military force, which Obama has now used to assassinate American citizens)

So, by passing the NDAA of 2012, Congress not only affirmed the prior interpretations of the 2001 AUMF, but also added that what it REALLY meant to say back in 2001 was that the President could use not just military force, and not just military detention, but also military trial, and even rendition to foreigners, and the language “any person” means just that – it can be used against any person the President designates as a covered person.

And the NDAA of 2012 also expanded the written list of entities that could be targeted beyond those noted in the 2001 AUMF and for a different time (See §1023 (b)(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.” Emphasis added).

A Legal Fiction – “We Didn’t Say Any of This Back in 2001, But This is What We Meant Way Back Then, So We Are NOT Expanding Powers, Just Clarifying The Powers We already Granted”

Why does Congress claim that the NDAA of 2012 did not expand the powers of the President?  Because it is operating under the legal fiction that all of the greatly expanded powers enumerated in writing for the first time in the NDAA of 2012 were, in fact, originally granted by Congress in the original AUMF in 2001, though nowhere mentioned in that original authorization, and thus, supposedly, the NDAA of 2012 does not affect existing law and authorities or expand the powers of the President, because Congress is pretending that it meant to grant all of these newly listed powers in the 2001 AUMF, though that original authorization makes no mention of the power to use military detention, military trial, or extraordinary rendition.  This legalistic, sophistic, “time travelling” legal fiction allows Congress to greatly expand the written scope of its AUMF, including adding, for the first time, written authorization to use military detention without trial, military trial, and even extraordinary rendition to foreign countries and entities, to include against U.S. citizens and lawful residents, while telling the American people that nothing has changed.   Such legalistic, retroactive, “time travel” is the height of deception.

Congress must now fix its error, and slam the door shut against any implied, interpreted, or inferred power to use the law of war on Americans.  It must pass a clear prohibition against the use of such war powers on its own people. Anything less is just not good enough in the current political and legal environment, where a sitting President is now killing American citizens from his secret snuff list, based on secrete evidence.

Stewart Rhodes

Founder of Oath Keepers and Yale Law School graduate

Kalispell, Montana

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.

28 Responses to “What Congress Must Do to Fix the Damage of NDAA, and Deny the U.S. Government the Power to Wage War on Americans”

  1. 1
    William Flatt Says:

    Just a suggestion, but since these pukes are waging war against their bosses; the American people, and the Constitution, why not arrest THEM and charge THEM with Treason?? Surely there are a few federal agents out there who have kept their oath and have the cojones to act accordingly? Or is it safe to say that there is no judge left in America who hasn’t been corrupted? The Constitution was written so the average American with a basic education can understand it, so I don’t see why it would be so hard for men of above average intelligence and higher education to apply it in their offices.

    If our state and (especially) federal government are so far gone that none can be trusted to act according to the Constitution, they need to be removed, post haste, and prevented from ever being able to exercise power over Americans ever again. Most of us ‘average Joes’ are sick to death of these pogues and would love nothing better than to see this once-great nation rid of this pollution.

    When any government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was created, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it. It’s time, and it’s too late to apologize.


    Nobody wants to see America become a two-way shooting range, but it is increasingly looking like that’s exactly what certain elites are counting on. As America inches closer to that fateful day, Congress wishes to enshrine in ‘law’ the unconstitutional power to pre-emptively remove those Americans that are likely to lead any kinetic effort to hold accountable those cretins that think they can undo the very thing that made America great. Yeah, they may choose to come after me, or after Mr. Rhodes, or you, or your neighbor. They might even be able to go after a certain percentage of us; say 1%. But they can’t go after EVERYONE and put them into concentration camps, so they’re hoping that – if push comes to shove – cutting the head (and the noisy rattle) off the rattlesnake will keep the rest from rising up. They would be wrong. Undoing the thing that made America the envy of the world for 200 years is only going to increase the size of the resistance.

    So I say: “Bring it!”

  2. 2
    Shorty Dawkins Says:

    At some point (hopefully soon, or we are doomed) those who are ignoring, or by other means circumventing and breaking their Oath to the Constitution, or willfully superseding the Constitution, must be charged and brought to trial. If there is never a penalty for illegal or Un-Constitutional actions, what can prevent these usurpations of power? What criminal mind can take seriously the Constitution or their Oath if there is no penalty of any kind for their actions?
    At what point will the American people say no more? When will it become obvious to enough Americans that their cherished Creator given Rights are being trampled on by the Powers That Be?
    Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, is an old saying. It is true. The Congesscritters and the Lackeys to the Power Elite we call the Administrative and Judicial branches of Government make a mockery of the American system of Government and laugh at us while they are doing so.

    Shorty Dawkins

  3. 3
    Rob Says:

    It is unlikely any significant changes will occur. Historically speaking, this is the way
    of things. I wish it were not. They may make some ’symbolic’ gestures. Something to lull
    the sheep back to sleep. Nothing more.

    Human nature is what it is. Power corrupts and… well everyone knows how that goes. We are
    who we are. The only real question is are there enough of us to prevail? Time will surely

  4. 4
    dick motta Says:

    It didn’t take long for the White House to expand the military’s domestic terrorism provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The DHS and Justice Department presented to the President the Strategic Implementation Plan for Local, State, Tribal, Federal and International police partners to prevent violent extremism in the United States. To enable the Plan, DHS envisions local information gathering solutions (Fusion Spy Centers) grants, curriculum and education. Congressional legislation, The American Jobs Act, will provide $5 billion in funding for additional police. The Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative (INS) will gather computer generated reports and the FBI, Joint Terrorism Task Force, will assure that the information is shared with all dometic and international police departments. An agency can simply identify and label an individual as an extremist and their on the domestic terrorist list. The police or military can then imprison you indefinitely. Your basic Constitutional rights to Habeas Corpus, Due Process and a Speedy Trial guaranteed under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments will be denied. This is America’s version of State Security. The similarities to Russia’s Gulag Archipelago are frightening. The President and Congressional representatives are turning the United States into a police state. If the American people value the principles of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, we have to work to get the politically elite out of power. While we still have the right, vote against all Federal incumbents that enabled the Military/Police State legislation. Vote against any Local, State or Federal candidate that favors the expansion and continuance of a Police State

  5. 5
    Lee Says:

    LA Military Exercises


  6. 6
    Suzanne Says:

    The Nationwide NDAA 2012 Congressional Protest is Feb. 3rd. Please spread the word!


  7. 7
    Suzanne Says:

    We ain’t seen nothing yet! The Enemy Expatriation Act is more remarkable then NDAA 2012.

  8. 8
    Andre Lefebvre, M B.A., Lt., U.S. Navy (ret.) Says:

    While I can not disagree with the above comments, I believe that the time has come to go to the next step, as words did not even capture the attention of Congress and never will under this current period. Unfortunately, the time for more words is wasted. Congress is not being held accountable for their or their lack of actions., on behalf of protecting “We the People”. We have reached a cross road, where we, as a people, have to take action to save both ourselves and the Republic.

    Unfortunately, all current so called Freedom Organizations continue to run at the mouth and do nothing. This includes the NRA and the Oath Keepers and like Organizations. If only, we could get rid of the lawyers and replace them with actual leaders, within these organization, possibly we could rally and organize, develop and create a front line Resistance Movement, with actual teeth. We never hear of any FBI, DEA, NSA, CIA agents and agents of the other alphabet governmental agencies or Senior Military Officers taking a position one way or another. I am all for waiting for the next elections, but, in the interim, people appear to forget the Boy Scouts’ saying of “Being Prepared”. If we do not take the initiative and if the elections do not solve, the current debacle, we will be behind the eight ball and we will get our butt handed to us. On the other hand, if we are prepared, the outcome could be totally different.

    As I read the Posts, I applaud the courage of many individuals, who profess their possible future actions, to recapture our Republic but, without the presence of operational organization and discipline, individuals will not be taken seriously. On the other hand, if we were to present an organized front, fully equipped , to carry out our operational goals, then the powers, at be, cannot ignore this, only at their peril. As we stand presently and keep running at the mouth, they can continue carrying out their agenda, with no fear of reprisals.Andre

  9. 9
    Mr. Peabody Says:

    This does not really matter. Even if it is repealed, it is always 3 steps forward, one step back.

    If this one is repealed, does it mean our constitution has been restored?

    Of course not.

  10. 10
    Lee Says:

    Maybe it is just me, but one of above comments drew my attention.
    First off, would we even be having this conversation, if it was not for an Attorney, right?

    Everything on this site is to educate people, some are still sleeping. I have seen no sign that input is not allowed, have you?

    So it seems to me, the only reason you have a “specific problem”, is because you have been sitting around, waiting for someone to do it for you!!!!

  11. 11
    Andre Lefebvre, M B.A., Lt., U.S. Navy (ret.) Says:

    You are correct, Lee.
    I should have been more specific in which lawyers, I was speaking about.
    This is not a ding against our Founder Stewart, of Oath Keepers.
    However, having said this, I was merely pointing out that, as long as lawyers are involved defending the government’s position, nothing will get rectify; as the job of lawyers is to debate their case. And Lee, after 21 years in the Navy and two tours in Vietnam, I am being very cautious before I will jump again. I do not fear combat or dying. I have been there and done that. I also do not want to waste my life, for the American Citizenry, if said citizens do not want to be helped. I am fully ready to defend and take care of my family, regardless of what the citizens are ready to do or not do. What I was also pointing out is that if we were more organized, possibly our position to restore the Republic, would be perceived as dedicated, organized and visible. Additionally, there are existing organizations already educating the public. Oath Keepers is one such an organization and I am proud to be one of its member. These organizations have already established internal structures and it would be much easier to initiate within an already established organization instead of starting at zero. The bottom line is basically to identify exactly what talent is available, within the membership and start thinking about organizing more formally. You do not wait until the bandits are in your living room before you start making plans to prevent such an action. It is a practical exercise in logistics.

  12. 12
    Charles R. Canfield Says:

    Reading and pondering this and many very good articles on here, frankly, I believe that we, all of us are scared shitless. Examples: we sat on our ass as the Government put in place the Most terrifying agency in our lives. The Homeland Security Farce. Now, just think about it like this; We, or most of us have taken an oath, defend this Great Nation against any and ALL enemies, Foreign and Domestic. Well, with the advent of the HSA, they virtually stripped every American of any Rights what so ever.
    The Patriot Act! What the Hell is that? There is not one thing that I can see that makes this Patriotic. it was written, voted into law by those who neither follow the Oath of Office, nor have very few, took OUR Oath to Defend, hell, most have guards, carry firearms and make Laws, supported by Rep. and Dem. making US the Enemy and the terrorist in our own Nation. They DID
    Medical Care? Who in Gods name thought that a Muslim in the White House could with the AID of our Elected High Archy demand, fine or imprison a free People with virtually a whimper from us.
    We watched as the UN and Hillary Clinton are now making Laws to strip us of the Right to OWN, Possess Arms, Ammunition with the threat of Imprisonment. Is this Freedom? No
    We watch as an Invasion Force and also a Foreign Army and Police Force enter OUR Nation at the Southern Border, yet not one of us can fire ONE shot to protect what we all love. Matter of fact, look at how the have done our Border Agents. Look at the weapons sold to the drug cartel and are our Leaders putting Holder, Obama or Janet Napolitano in Prison? No. It is like Waco, Ruby Ridge. The High and Mighty can have you and I slaughtered, along with our Wives and babies.
    911 was caused by our own stupidity, and I fear we will see worse next time. Who let these cobra into America? Let them fly, lie, slaughter us at FT. Hood?

  13. 13
    Mike Says:

    As this video points out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MZCHjGkTPg&feature=related

    many of our elected officials possess a particular type of personality disorder that clouds any empathy or true moral reasoning. I think that the recent passage of NDAA and the attempt to censor the internet tends to validate this psychological observation.

  14. 14
    Freedom Warrior Says:

    This is Ron Paul’s famous Predictions speech from April 24, 2002. This is the original video compiling recent images and video to give his speech a chilling effect.

    “I have no timetable for these predictions, but just in case, keep them around and look at them in 5-10 years. Let’s hope and pray that I’m wrong on all accounts. If so, I will be very pleased. ” Ron Paul

    Intelligence Officer: Ron Paul’s Right on Iran: Jan 13, 2012 Former Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer explains why he says Ron Paul’s stance towards Iran is the most grounded in reality of the GOP candidates. http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1389827493001/inte...

    Ron Paul gets endorsement from former CIA agent in “Bin Laden Unit” January 2, 2012

    Scheuer notes that throughout the Republican primary campaign, Rep. Paul has raised more money from active duty military members than all other candidates combined, including Barack Obama.

  15. 15
    Karen Rawlins Says:

    I am sharing this letter about NDAA with everyone and telling Everyone I can about this Horrendous act from this President Obama. The potential for a Civil uprising, due to the fear that this one law alone will destroy our faith in the government we had once come to trust, now is out to kill us. At the very least, it gives a future President the power to do terrible things to an already suspicious, fearful and self-protective people. This law also enforces the long held belief from many, that they ARE going to Have to take up their arms and come together with the many other states militia groups, for the protection of their families and land. These very people that have worked, paid their taxes faithfully and willingly, and taught their children to respect authority, vote and get involved in civil,State and Federal Governing, are now going to be taught not to trust any government authority that is not committed to life and liberty. What a Shame this day is to have to admit to the whole world that our President has such a view of his Nation that he would risk putting us all in this kind of dangerous predicament. I am sure there are the many that also hate our Nation, that are laughing as they watch our nation being destroyed from within.

  16. 16
    Victor Smith Says:

    Making some points:
    1. We are definitely thankful for the lawyers that have helped make this a “nation of Law” if only WE THE PEOPLE can keep it, as B. Franklin advised.
    2. Several comments address the need to stop waiting for somebody else to do what needs to be done for us.
    3. I have decided to do just that, one more time. I am THE CONSERVATIVE candidate for Ohio’s 6th Congressional District. My opponent in the Primary is a RINO who sent this following letter to his bosses – WE THE PEOPLE – to explain what a great job he did with NDAA 2012.
    4. You are invited to follow my campaign progress to send BJ home and out of Congress. My Operator’s Manual for this job is The US Constitution.

    Thanx BuKu, VGS
    US Army, Ret’d
    Registered Professional Engineer

    ——Letter from the incumbent RINO who must GO—————–

    From: Representative Bill Johnson
    Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 2:55 PM
    To: g
    Subject: Responding to your message

    December 22, 2011

    Dear John,

    Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to a provision within the H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, that would allegedly allow for the detention of United States citizens. I appreciate having the benefit of your views on this very important issue.

    I understand you are concerned that there was a provision within the National Defense Authorization Bill that would allow for the indefinite detention of United States citizens. While an earlier draft of H.R. 1540 included poorly drafted language that could have been interpreted to have allowed such detentions, the final version of this bill does not grant any new authority to detain U.S. citizens. In fact, H.R. 1540 was amended to protect U.S. citizens from detainment.

    H.R. 1540 does establish a new requirement for military custody of foreign terrorists in a plot to attack the U.S.; however, this requirement only applies to individuals who support or are members of al-Qaeda and associated forces, and who are caught plotting an attack on the U.S. U.S. citizens are explicitly exempt from the requirement for military custody of terrorists. Please be assured that, as a proud Air Force veteran, I will always fight to protect your rights as citizens that are guaranteed to you by the United States Constitution.

    The final version of H.R. 1540 passed the House of Representatives on December 14, 2011, by a vote of 283 “yeas” to 136 “nays.” It passed the Senate on December 15, 2011, by a vote of 86 “yeas” to 13 “nays,” and was presented to President Obama on December 21, 2011.

    Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may be of further assistance to you. I also encourage you to follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and at http://www.billjohnson.house.gov, so that you may keep track of my most recent work in Congress. I look forward to hearing from you in the future.


    Bill Johnson
    Member of Congress

  17. 17
    Andre Lefebvre, M B.A., Lt., U.S. Navy (ret.) Says:

    By Mr. Bill Johnson’s numbers, there are still 136 Representatives and 13 Senators working against “We the People”. It would be helpful if we could identify those individuals so, that we can target them for replacement, at election time. Andre

  18. 18
    Matt Says:

    Can the congress people that voted in favor of this law be charged with treason?
    Crimes against humanity?
    Willfoe oppression and enslavement of a free people?
    Unlawful attempt to alienate a free people from our inalienable rights?
    I think a case can be made to charge the traitors with treason.

  19. 19
    Lee Says:

    Here is the list Andre….





  20. 20
    Flip Says:

    I think that any of the people in Congress who voted in the afrimative for NDAA have committed perjury and should be removed from their office immediately. They swore an oath “to 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” and they have managed to violate that oath multiple times and have endangered the lives and well being of the citizens they to the oath to protect. I think that the president is in the same situation and should be removed likewise. If they are removed then MAYBE the next person to take their place will READ the constitution and honor their oath. If not out they go.

  21. 21
    SPC Goode Says:

    Who are we lobying and do we have a list of Reps that are attempting to repeal this bill? There are 18 states that have Representative Recall Laws. Those that voted for NDAA in those states can be recalled. Everyone should be sending emails to their Reps (I got the standard, This does not apply to citizens BS). Get this out to all of the blogs. I think we whould setup PROTESTS in EVERY CITY on Presidents Day in Feb… if that is not too short of notice. We really need to push hard on this.

  22. 22
    Andre Lefebvre, M B.A., Lt., U.S. Navy (ret.) Says:

    I want to thank you, for the trouble you went through, in procuring the names on both the Senate and the House, who voted against H. R. 1540.This information will be very useful.
    Again, thanks.

  23. 23
    Andre Lefebvre, M B.A., Lt., U.S. Navy (ret.) Says:

    I am looking at the final Republican Primary, in Florida and I do not understand why Mr. Ron Paul is not securing more votes. I do not agree with his foreign policy but, I am on board on most of his other positions, which he has articulated. The results of the Florida Primary definitely demonstrate that “We the People” either do not care or do not understand what is at stake.

  24. 24
    Bill Alexander Says:

    All those that Voted this Terrible Bill Into law, and those that agree, should be charged with Treason and delt with, according to the Constitution!!

  25. 25
    Chris Says:

    I love the site.. I have a question about responsibility with the oath that we took to get into the armed forces..

    I went through the steps at the Houston MEPS center and then raised my right hand and swore the same oath to defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic.. cool, I know.. I was not allowed in. 4 days before my ship date to the Navy they called and told me I wasn’t able to go. I quit drinking, and smoking and started running. I did not ever get my chance, as I wasn’t allowed to go to basic training..

    Seeing as I swore the same oath, which I hold this oath dear to this day, how can I be of assistance? I love this country just as much as any one of the marines on the front lines fighting for my freedom.

    I thank each and every one of you for doing what I was not able and keep this country free!!

    I hold a black belt in Marital arts (agian, yippee, I know) but no training in my adult life with a gun.. I was, however, trained by a Marine Recon that served 2 tours in Vietnam, so I do know a thing or two… anyway, I do not like what is going on in our capital and not only the ILLEGAL-ALIEN occupying our most beloved house..

    again I ask, How can I help..

  26. 26
    Douglas-Paul Says:

    Our elected officials continue to disregaurd thier oath of office & violate the constitution. This issue needs to be addressed repealing it!

  27. 27
    Lee Says:

    You can put what I sent you here.

  28. 28
    Freedom Warrior Says:

    Judge Napolitano fired from fox news for speaking out ABOUT THIS!

Leave a Reply

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