No products in the cart.

News

The Last Roundup By Christopher Ketcham

Background on MAIN CORE

For decades the federal government has been developing a highly classified plan that would override the Constitution in the event of a terrorist attack. Is it also compiling a secret enemies list of citizens who could face detention under martial law?

Main Core_a

 

The Last Roundup

[EA note: This article first appeared in “Radar Magazine” —  April 28 2008. I took it from here  http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19871.htm on April 05, 2009]

________________

By Christopher Ketcham

 

In the spring of 2007, a retired senior official in the U.S. Justice Department sat before Congress and told a story so odd and ominous, it could have sprung from the pages of a pulp political thriller. It was about a principled bureaucrat struggling to protect his country from a highly classified program with sinister implications. Rife with high drama, it included a car chase through the streets of Washington, D.C., and a tense meeting at the White House, where the president’s henchmen made the bureaucrat so nervous that he demanded a neutral witness be present.

The bureaucrat was James Comey, John Ashcroft’s second-in-command at the Department of Justice during Bush’s first term. Comey had been a loyal political foot soldier of the Republican Party for many years. Yet in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he described how he had grown increasingly uneasy reviewing the Bush administration’s various domestic surveillance and spying programs. Much of his testimony centered on an operation so clandestine he wasn’t allowed to name it or even describe what it did. He did say, however, that he and Ashcroft had discussed the program in March 2004, trying to decide whether it was legal under federal statutes. Shortly before the certification deadline, Ashcroft fell ill with pancreatitis, making Comey acting attorney general, and Comey opted not to certify the program. When he communicated his decision to the White House, Bush’s men told him, in so many words, to take his concerns and stuff them in an undisclosed location.

Comey refused to knuckle under, and the dispute came to a head on the cold night of March 10, 2004, hours before the program’s authorization was to expire. At the time, Ashcroft was in intensive care at George Washington Hospital following emergency surgery. Apparently, at the behest of President Bush himself, the White House tried, in Comey’s words, “to take advantage of a very sick man,” sending Chief of Staff Andrew Card and then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales on a mission to Ashcroft’s sickroom to persuade the heavily doped attorney general to override his deputy. Apprised of their mission, Comey, accompanied by a full security detail, jumped in his car, raced through the streets of the capital, lights blazing, and “literally ran” up the hospital stairs to beat them there.

Minutes later, Gonzales and Card arrived with an envelope filled with the requisite forms. Ashcroft, even in his stupor, did not fall for their heavy-handed ploy. “I’m not the attorney general,” Ashcroft told Bush’s men. “There”—he pointed weakly to Comey—”is the attorney general.” Gonzales and Card were furious, departing without even acknowledging Comey’s presence in the room. The following day, the classified domestic spying program that Comey found so disturbing went forward at the demand of the White House—”without a signature from the Department of Justice attesting as to its legality,” he testified.

What was the mysterious program that had so alarmed Comey? Political blogs buzzed for weeks with speculation. Though Comey testified that the program was subsequently readjusted to satisfy his concerns, one can’t help wondering whether the unspecified alteration would satisfy constitutional experts, or even average citizens. Faced with push-back from his bosses at the White House, did he simply relent and accept a token concession? Two months after Comey’s testimony to Congress, the New York Times reported a tantalizing detail: The program that prompted him “to threaten resignation involved computer searches through massive electronic databases.” The larger mystery remained intact, however. “It is not known precisely why searching the databases, or data mining, raised such a furious legal debate,” the article conceded.

Another clue came from a rather unexpected source: President Bush himself. Addressing the nation from the Oval Office in 2005 after the first disclosures of the NSA’s warrantless electronic surveillance became public, Bush insisted that the spying program in question was reviewed “every 45 days” as part of planning to assess threats to “the continuity of our government.”

Few Americans—professional journalists included—know anything about so-called Continuity of Government (COG) programs, so it’s no surprise that the president’s passing reference received almost no attention. COG resides in a nebulous legal realm, encompassing national emergency plans that would trigger the takeover of the country by extra-constitutional forces—and effectively suspend the republic. In short, it’s a road map for martial law.

While Comey, who left the Department of Justice in 2005, has steadfastly refused to comment further on the matter, a number of former government employees and intelligence sources with independent knowledge of domestic surveillance operations claim the program that caused the flap between Comey and the White House was related to a database of Americans who might be considered potential threats in the event of a national emergency. Sources familiar with the program say that the government’s data gathering has been overzealous and probably conducted in violation of federal law and the protection from unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

According to a senior government official who served with high-level security clearances in five administrations, “There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived ‘enemies of the state’ almost instantaneously.” He and other sources tell Radar that the database is sometimes referred to by the code name Main Core. One knowledgeable source claims that 8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect. In the event of a national emergency, these people could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.

Of course, federal law is somewhat vague as to what might constitute a “national emergency.” Executive orders issued over the last three decades define it as a “natural disaster, military attack, [or] technological or other emergency,” while Department of Defense documents include eventualities like “riots, acts of violence, insurrections, unlawful obstructions or assemblages, [and] disorder prejudicial to public law and order.” According to one news report, even “national opposition to U.S. military invasion abroad” could be a trigger.

Illustration courtesy SALON MAGAZINE
Illustration courtesy SALON MAGAZINE

Let’s imagine a harrowing scenario: coordinated bombings in several American cities culminating in a major blast—say, a suitcase nuke—in New York City. Thousands of civilians are dead. Commerce is paralyzed. A state of emergency is declared by the president. Continuity of Governance plans that were developed during the Cold War and have been aggressively revised since 9/11 go into effect. Surviving government officials are shuttled to protected underground complexes carved into the hills of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Power shifts to a “parallel government” that consists of scores of secretly preselected officials. (As far back as the 1980s, Donald Rumsfeld, then CEO of a pharmaceutical company, and Dick Cheney, then a congressman from Wyoming, were slated to step into key positions during a declared emergency.) The executive branch is the sole and absolute seat of authority, with Congress and the judiciary relegated to advisory roles at best. The country becomes, within a matter of hours, a police state.

Interestingly, plans drawn up during the Reagan administration suggest this parallel government would be ruling under authority given by law to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, home of the same hapless bunch that recently proved themselves unable to distribute water to desperate hurricane victims. The agency’s incompetence in tackling natural disasters is less surprising when one considers that, since its inception in the 1970s, much of its focus has been on planning for the survival of the federal government in the wake of a decapitating nuclear strike.

Under law, during a national emergency, FEMA and its parent organization, the Department of Homeland Security, would be empowered to seize private and public property, all forms of transport, and all food supplies. The agency could dispatch military commanders to run state and local governments, and it could order the arrest of citizens without a warrant, holding them without trial for as long as the acting government deems necessary. From the comfortable perspective of peaceful times, such behavior by the government may seem farfetched. But it was not so very long ago that FDR ordered 120,000 Japanese-Americans—everyone from infants to the elderly—be held in detention camps for the duration of World War II. This is widely regarded as a shameful moment in U.S. history, a lesson learned. But a long trail of federal documents indicates that the possibility of large-scale detention has never quite been abandoned by federal authorities. Around the time of the 1968 race riots, for instance, a paper drawn up at the U.S. Army War College detailed plans for rounding up millions of “militants” and “American negroes” who were to be held at “assembly centers or relocation camps.” In the late 1980s, the Austin American-Statesman and other publications reported the existence of 10 detention camp sites on military facilities nationwide, where hundreds of thousands of people could be held in the event of domestic political upheaval. More such facilities were commissioned in 2006, when Kellogg Brown & Root—then a subsidiary of Halliburton—was handed a $385 million contract to establish “temporary detention and processing capabilities” for the Department of Homeland Security. The contract is short on details, stating only that the facilities would be used for “an emergency influx of immigrants, or to support the rapid development of new programs.” Just what those “new programs” might be is not specified.

In the days after our hypothetical terror attack, events might play out like this: With the population gripped by fear and anger, authorities undertake unprecedented actions in the name of public safety. Officials at the Department of Homeland Security begin actively scrutinizing people who—for a tremendously broad set of reasons—have been flagged in Main Core as potential domestic threats. Some of these individuals might receive a letter or a phone call, others a request to register with local authorities. Still others might hear a knock on the door and find police or armed soldiers outside. In some instances, the authorities might just ask a few questions. Other suspects might be arrested and escorted to federal holding facilities, where they could be detained without counsel until the state of emergency is no longer in effect.

It is, of course, appropriate for any government to plan for the worst. But when COG plans are shrouded in extreme secrecy, effectively unregulated by Congress or the courts, and married to an overreaching surveillance state—as seems to be the case with Main Core—even sober observers must weigh whether the protections put in place by the federal government are becoming more dangerous to America than any outside threat.

Another well-informed source—a former military operative regularly briefed by members of the intelligence community—says this particular program has roots going back at least to the 1980s and was set up with help from the Defense Intelligence Agency. He has been told that the program utilizes software that makes predictive judgments of targets’ behavior and tracks their circle of associations with “social network analysis” and artificial intelligence modeling tools.

“The more data you have on a particular target, the better [the software] can predict what the target will do, where the target will go, who it will turn to for help,” he says. “Main Core is the table of contents for all the illegal information that the U.S. government has [compiled] on specific targets.” An intelligence expert who has been briefed by high-level contacts in the Department of Homeland Security confirms that a database of this sort exists, but adds that “it is less a mega-database than a way to search numerous other agency databases at the same time.”

Main Core_Chuck-Norris-vs.-Obama

A host of publicly disclosed programs, sources say, now supply data to Main Core. Most notable are the NSA domestic surveillance programs, initiated in the wake of 9/11, typically referred to in press reports as “warrantless wiretapping.” In March, a front-page article in the Wall Street Journal shed further light onto the extraordinarily invasive scope of the NSA efforts: According to the Journal, the government can now electronically monitor “huge volumes of records of domestic e-mails and Internet searches, as well as bank transfers, credit card transactions, travel, and telephone records.” Authorities employ “sophisticated software programs” to sift through the data, searching for “suspicious patterns.” In effect, the program is a mass catalog of the private lives of Americans. And it’s notable that the article hints at the possibility of programs like Main Core. “The [NSA] effort also ties into data from an ad-hoc collection of so-called black programs whose existence is undisclosed,” the Journal reported, quoting unnamed officials. “Many of the programs in various agencies began years before the 9/11 attacks but have since been given greater reach.”

The following information seems to be fair game for collection without a warrant: the e-mail addresses you send to and receive from, and the subject lines of those messages; the phone numbers you dial, the numbers that dial in to your line, and the durations of the calls; the Internet sites you visit and the keywords in your Web searches; the destinations of the airline tickets you buy; the amounts and locations of your ATM withdrawals; and the goods and services you purchase on credit cards. All of this information is archived on government supercomputers and, according to sources, also fed into the Main Core database.

Main Core also allegedly draws on four smaller databases that, in turn, cull from federal, state, and local “intelligence” reports; print and broadcast media; financial records; “commercial databases”; and unidentified “private sector entities.” Additional information comes from a database known as the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment, which generates watch lists from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for use by airlines, law enforcement, and border posts. According to the Washington Post, the Terrorist Identities list has quadrupled in size between 2003 and 2007 to include about 435,000 names. The FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center border crossing list, which listed 755,000 persons as of fall 2007, grows by 200,000 names a year. A former NSA officer tells Radar that the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, using an electronic-funds transfer surveillance program, also contributes data to Main Core, as does a Pentagon program that was created in 2002 to monitor anti-war protestors and environmental activists such as Greenpeace.

If previous FEMA and FBI lists are any indication, the Main Core database includes dissidents and activists of various stripes, political and tax protestors, lawyers and professors, publishers and journalists, gun owners, illegal aliens, foreign nationals, and a great many other harmless, average people.

A veteran CIA intelligence analyst who maintains active high-level clearances and serves as an advisor to the Department of Defense in the field of emerging technology tells Radar that during the 2004 hospital room drama, James Comey expressed concern over how this secret database was being used “to accumulate otherwise private data on non-targeted U.S. citizens for use at a future time.” Though not specifically familiar with the name Main Core, he adds, “What was being requested of Comey for legal approval was exactly what a Main Core story would be.” A source regularly briefed by people inside the intelligence community adds: “Comey had discovered that President Bush had authorized NSA to use a highly classified and compartmentalized Continuity of Government database on Americans in computerized searches of its domestic intercepts. [Comey] had concluded that the use of that ‘Main Core’ database compromised the legality of the overall NSA domestic surveillance project.”

If Main Core does exist, says Philip Giraldi, a former CIA counterterrorism officer and an outspoken critic of the agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is its likely home. “If a master list is being compiled, it would have to be in a place where there are no legal issues”—the CIA and FBI would be restricted by oversight and accountability laws—”so I suspect it is at DHS, which as far as I know operates with no such restraints.” Giraldi notes that DHS already maintains a central list of suspected terrorists and has been freely adding people who pose no reasonable threat to domestic security. “It’s clear that DHS has the mandate for controlling and owning master lists. The process is not transparent, and the criteria for getting on the list are not clear.” Giraldi continues, “I am certain that the content of such a master list [as Main Core] would not be carefully vetted, and there would be many names on it for many reasons—quite likely, including the two of us.”

Would Main Core in fact be legal? According to constitutional scholar Bruce Fein, who served as associate deputy attorney general under Ronald Reagan, the question of legality is murky: “In the event of a national emergency, the executive branch simply assumes these powers”—the powers to collect domestic intelligence and draw up detention lists, for example—” if Congress doesn’t explicitly prohibit it. It’s really up to Congress to put these things to rest, and Congress has not done so.” Fein adds that it is virtually impossible to contest the legality of these kinds of data collection and spy programs in court “when there are no criminal prosecutions and [there is] no notice to persons on the president’s ‘enemies list.’ That means if Congress remains invertebrate, the law will be whatever the president says it is—even in secret. He will be the judge on his own powers and invariably rule in his own favor.”

The veteran CIA intelligence analyst notes that Comey’s suggestion that the offending elements of the program were dropped could be misleading: “Bush [may have gone ahead and] signed it as a National Intelligence Finding anyway.”

But even if we never face a national emergency, the mere existence of the database is a matter of concern. “The capacity for future use of this information against the American people is so great as to be virtually unfathomable,” the senior government official says.

In any case, mass watch lists of domestic citizens may do nothing to make us safer from terrorism. Jeff Jonas, chief scientist at IBM, a world renowned expert in data mining, contends that such efforts won’t prevent terrorist conspiracies. “Because there is so little historical terrorist event data,” Jonas tells Radar, “there is not enough volume to create precise predictions.”

The overzealous compilation of a domestic watch list is not unique in post-war American history. In 1950, the FBI, under the notoriously paranoid J. Edgar Hoover, began to “accumulate the names, identities, and activities” of suspect American citizens in a rapidly expanding “security index,” according to declassified documents. In a letter to the Truman White House, Hoover stated that in the event of certain emergency situations, suspect individuals would be held in detention camps overseen by “the National Military Establishment.” By 1960, a congressional investigation later revealed, the FBI list of suspicious persons included “professors, teachers, and educators; labor-union organizers and leaders; writers, lecturers, newsmen, and others in the mass-media field; lawyers, doctors, and scientists; other potentially influential persons on a local or national level; [and] individuals who could potentially furnish financial or material aid” to unnamed “subversive elements.” This same FBI “security index” was allegedly maintained and updated into the 1980s, when it was reportedly transferred to the control of none other than FEMA (though the FBI denied this at the time).

FEMA, however—then known as the Federal Preparedness Agency—already had its own domestic surveillance system in place, according to a 1975 investigation by Senator John V. Tunney of California. Tunney, the son of heavyweight boxing champion Gene Tunney and the inspiration for Robert Redford’s character in the film The Candidate, found that the agency maintained electronic dossiers on at least 100,000 Americans, which contained information gleaned from wideranging computerized surveillance. The database was located in the agency’s secret underground city at Mount Weather, near the town of Bluemont, Virginia. The senator’s findings were confirmed in a 1976 investigation by the Progressive magazine, which found that the Mount Weather computers “can obtain millions of pieces [of] information on the personal lives of American citizens by tapping the data stored at any of the 96 Federal Relocation Centers”—a reference to other classified facilities. According to the Progressive, Mount Weather’s databases were run “without any set of stated rules or regulations. Its surveillance program remains secret even from the leaders of the House and the Senate.”

Ten years later, a new round of government martial law plans came to light. A report in the Miami Herald contended that Reagan loyalist and Iran-Contra conspirator Colonel Oliver North had spearheaded the development of a “secret contingency plan,”—code named REX 84—which called “for suspension of the Constitution, turning control of the United States over to FEMA, [and the] appointment of military commanders to run state and local governments.” The North plan also reportedly called for the detention of upwards of 400,000 illegal aliens and an undisclosed number of American citizens in at least 10 military facilities maintained as potential holding camps.

North’s program was so sensitive in nature that when Texas Congressman Jack Brooks attempted to question North about it during the 1987 Iran-Contra hearings, he was rebuffed even by his fellow legislators. “I read in Miami papers and several others that there had been a plan by that same agency [FEMA] that would suspend the American Constitution,” Brooks said. “I was deeply concerned about that and wondered if that was the area in which he [North] had worked.” Senator Daniel Inouye, chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Iran, immediately cut off his colleague, saying, “That question touches upon a highly sensitive and classified area, so may I request that you not touch upon that, sir.” Though Brooks pushed for an answer, the line of questioning was not allowed to proceed.

Wired magazine turned up additional damaging information, revealing in 1993 that North, operating from a secure White House site, allegedly employed a software database program called PROMIS (ostensibly as part of the REX 84 plan). PROMIS, which has a strange and controversial history, was designed to track individuals—prisoners, for example—by pulling together information from disparate databases into a single record. According to Wired, “Using the computers in his command center, North tracked dissidents and potential troublemakers within the United States. Compared to PROMIS, Richard Nixon’s enemies list or Senator Joe McCarthy’s blacklist looks downright crude.” Sources have suggested to Radar that government databases tracking Americans today, including Main Core, could still have PROMIS based legacy code from the days when North was running his programs.

In the wake of 9/11, domestic surveillance programs of all sorts expanded dramatically. As one well-placed source in the intelligence community puts it, “The gloves seemed to come off.” What is not yet clear is what sort of still-undisclosed programs may have been authorized by the Bush White House. Marty Lederman, a high-level official at the Department of Justice under Clinton, writing on a law blog last year, wondered, “How extreme were the programs they implemented [after 9/11]? How egregious was the lawbreaking?” Congress has tried, and mostly failed, to find out.

In July 2007 and again last August, Rep. Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon and a senior member of the House Homeland Security Committee, sought access to the “classified annexes” of the Bush administration’s Continuity of Government program. DeFazio’s interest was prompted by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20 (also known as NSPD-51), issued in May 2007, which reserves for the executive branch the sole authority to decide what constitutes a national emergency and to determine when the emergency is over. DeFazio found this unnerving.

But he and other leaders of the Homeland Security Committee, including Chairman Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, were denied a review of the Continuity of Government classified annexes. To this day, their calls for disclosure have been ignored by the White House. In a press release issued last August, DeFazio went public with his concerns that the NSPD-51 Continuity of Government plans are “extra-constitutional or unconstitutional.” Around the same time, he told the Oregonian, “Maybe the people who think there’s a conspiracy out there are right.”

Congress itself has recently widened the path for both extra-constitutional detentions by the White House and the domestic use of military force during a national emergency. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 effectively suspended habeas corpus and freed up the executive branch to designate any American citizen an “enemy combatant” forfeiting all privileges accorded under the Bill of Rights. The John Warner National Defense Authorization Act, also passed in 2006, included a last-minute rider titled “Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies,” which allowed the deployment of U.S. military units not just to put down domestic insurrections—as permitted under posse comitatus and the Insurrection Act of 1807—but also to deal with a wide range of calamities, including “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack, or incident.”

More troubling, in 2002, Congress authorized funding for the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, which, according to Washington Post military intelligence
expert William Arkin, “allows for emergency military operations in the United States without civilian supervision or control.”

“We are at the edge of a cliff and we’re about to fall off,” says constitutional lawyer and former Reagan administration official Bruce Fein. “To a national emergency planner, everybody looks like a danger to stability. There’s no doubt that Congress would have the authority to denounce all this—for example, to refuse to appropriate money for the preparation of a list of U.S. citizens to be detained in the event of martial law. But Congress is the invertebrate branch. They say, ‘We have to be cautious.’ The same old crap you associate with cowards. None of this will change under a Democratic administration, unless you have exceptional statesmanship and the courage to stand up and say, ‘You know, democracies accept certain risks that tyrannies do not.’ ”

As of this writing, DeFazio, Thompson, and the other 433 members of the House are debating the so-called Protect America Act, after a similar bill passed in the Senate. Despite its name, the act offers no protection for U.S. citizens; instead, it would immunize from litigation U.S. telecom giants for colluding with the government in the surveillance of Americans to feed the hungry maw of databases like Main Core. The Protect America Act would legalize programs that appear to be unconstitutional.

Meanwhile, the mystery of James Comey’s testimony has disappeared in the morass of election year coverage. None of the leading presidential candidates have been asked the questions that are so profoundly pertinent to the future of the country: As president, will you continue aggressive domestic surveillance programs in the vein of the Bush administration? Will you release the COG blueprints that Representatives DeFazio and Thompson were not allowed to read? What does it suggest about the state of the nation that the U.S. is now ranked by worldwide civil liberties groups as an “endemic surveillance society,” alongside repressive regimes such as China and Russia? How can a democracy thrive with a massive apparatus of spying technology deployed against every act of political expression, private or public? (Radar put these questions to spokespeople for the McCain, Obama, and Clinton campaigns, but at press time had yet to receive any responses.)

These days, it’s rare to hear a voice like that of Senator Frank Church, who in the 1970s led the explosive investigations into U.S. domestic intelligence crimes that prompted the very reforms now being eroded. “The technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny,” Church pointed out in 1975. “And there would be no way to fight back, because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know.”
end

Main Core_b

< Back To MindWar >

0

Elias Alias

Editor in Chief for Oath Keepers; Unemployed poet; Lover of Nature and Nature's beauty. Slave to all cats. Reading interests include study of hidden history, classical literature. Concerned Constitutional American. Honorably discharged USMC Viet Nam Veteran. Founder, TheMentalMilitia.Net

Oath Keepers Merchandise

17 comments

  1. Additional reading:

    Wikipedia on Main Core: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Core

    Blurb from Wikipedia site:
    “Main Core is the code name of a database maintained since the 1980s by the federal government of the United States. Main Core contains personal and financial data of millions of U.S. citizens believed to be threats to national security.[1] The data, which comes from the NSA, FBI, CIA, and other sources,[1] is collected and stored without warrants or court orders.[1] The database’s name derives from the fact that it contains “copies of the ‘main core’ or essence of each item of intelligence information on Americans produced by the FBI and the other agencies of the U.S. intelligence community.”

    The Main Core database is believed to have originated with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 1982, following Ronald Reagan’s Continuity of Operations plan outlined in the National Security Directive (NSD) 69 / National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 55, entitled “Enduring National Leadership,” implemented on September 14, 1982.[1][2]

    As of 2008 there were reportedly eight million Americans listed in the database as possible threats, often for trivial reasons, whom the government may choose to track, question, or detain in a time of crisis.[3]

    The existence of the database was first reported on in May 2008 by Christopher Ketcham[4] and in July 2008 by Tim Shorrock.

    .

    From 2008, SALON Magazine’s article on Main Core: http://www.salon.com/2008/07/23/new_churchcomm/

    From Silver Doctors in June of 2013:
    http://www.silverdoctors.com/main-core-a-list-of-8-million-americans-that-will-be-subject-to-detention-during-martial-law/

    Salute!
    Elias

    1. AMEN ..MY COLORS ARE NAVY BLUE….TRIDE AND TRUE FOR IN GOD WE TRUST IN THE RED WHITE AND BLUE LOVE TO ALL…THE YANKEE DOODLE DIVA ¡

  2. Okay, this is a “told you so”. The Bush’s are TRAITORS to the US Constitution, to the USA, to the American people, TO THOSE WHO SERVED/SERVE IN THE US MILITARY, AS IS THE CLINTON’S – yes, both; AND AS IS OBAMA.

    TREASON –>> “It is the sacred principles enshrined in the UN Charter to which we will henceforth pledge our allegiance.” George Herbert Walker Bush, Speech at the UN, February 1, 1992

    That is verifiable by every lie told, by every non CONSTITUTIONAL action taken, by every action they, AND THEIR ADMINISTRATIONS took against the US Constitution – our government, and what YOU (generic “you”) gave your solemn OATH that is the “blank check” (and no, it does NOT go to any person, that blank check is to the US Constitution) to, up to and including your life.

    That is why you MUST NOT follow their orders today, tomorrow, ever until we get all of them through the Grand Jury investigation and through prosecution none of them can be trusted – and that MOST CLEARLY MEANS THE TOP MILITARY BRASS.

    LE’s READ THIS; they can NOT do it without using you and the US military (okay, except for the foreign and contract troops located all over the USA) against America, against her people – YOUR people, to bring down from within the USA and the US Constitution. Okay READ;

    The opinion in Mack and Printz v. United States stated, “The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the State and Federal Governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S POWER WOULD BE AUGMENTED IMMEASURABLY AND IMPERMISSIBLY IF IT WERE ABLE TO IMPRESS INTO ITS SERVICE–AND AT NO COST TO ITSELF–THE POLICE OFFICERS OF THE 50 STATES… Federal control of state officers would also have an effect upon the separation and equilibration of powers between the three branches of the Federal Government itself. (caps are mine for emphasis)

    That action would be TREASON on the parts of all who participate. There is no such powers assigned to anyone within the state or federal governments to declare “emergency powers” or “martial law”. The declaration and implementation of either or both IS the takeover of the USA by the traitors within our nation USING those in the US Military and LE’s.

    “Emergency does not create power. Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions upon power granted or reserved. The Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the Federal Government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the light of emergency and they are not altered by emergency.” Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398, 425 (1934)

    Justice William O. Douglas: “The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of the people.”

    Justice William O. Douglas: “We must realize that today’s Establishment is the New George III, Whether it will continue to adhere to his tactics, we do not know. If it does, the redress, honored in tradition, is also revolution.”

    Benjamin Franklin: “In free governments the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns. For the former, therefore, to return among the latter was not to degrade but to promote them.”

    Alexander Hamilton: “The truth is, after all the declamations we have heard, that the Constitution is itself, in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, A BILL OF RIGHTS.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.”

    “I shall exert every faculty I possess in aiding to prevent the Constitution from being nullified, destroyed, or impaired; and even though I should see it fail, I will still, with a voice feeble, perhaps, but earnest as ever issued from human lips, and with extinguish, call on the people to come to its rescue.” Daniel Webster

    “A true patriot does not confuse government with country. A patriot’s loyalty is to his country, and loyalty to country requires holding government accountable.” Paul Craig Roberts

    “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does NOT mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country.” Theodore Roosevelt

    “The people or sovereign are not bound by general word in statutes, restrictive of prerogative right, title or interest, unless expressly named. Acts of limitation do not bind the King or the people. The people have been ceded all the rights of the King, the former sovereign, …It is a maxim of the common law, that when an act is made for the common good and to prevent injury, the King shall be bound, though not named, but when a statute is general and prerogative right would be divested or taken from the King (or the people) he shall not be bound.” People v Herkimer, 4 Cowen (NY) 345, 348 (1825)

    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, 1866

  3. “For decades the federal government has been developing a highly classified plan that would override the Constitution in the event of a terrorist attack. ”

    For those of you who are ignorant of the US Constitution THERE IS NOTHING THAT “overrides” THE US CONSTITUTION except TREASON, If you want to call that an “override”.

    1. @ Cal, forgive me for sounding or being stupid, I have heard that phrase nothing overrides the Constitution. Is that the truth? If so then why can,t we just go about our lives as CITIZENS, armed of course and do our daily business as in minding our own and you the usurpers of our Constitution fight it out among your selves while we the CITIZENS rebuild our Country. By the way if you pull your gun I will do the same.LOL!!! But Seriously if that all there really is to it and I am a simple guy KISS sounds like the best way to get it started. Sooner it is started sooner it is finished.

      1. ” If so then why can,t we just go about our lives as CITIZENS…”

        I repeat myself here, but THERE IS NOTHING THAT “overrides” THE US CONSTITUTION except TREASON, If you want to call that an “override”.

        “But Seriously if that all there really is to it and I am a simple guy KISS sounds like the best way to get it started. Sooner it is started sooner it is finished.”

        Treason, nor the traitors that are committing it are not simple in any way. There are those who are/were “dumbed down” after decades of misinformation that are “just following orders” and “just doing their jobs” without realizing that their job and priority “order” is within that Oath. It REQUIRES them to be a Constitutionalist – up to even putting their life on the line for it (speaking of military/LE’s here). But that is actually required of all.

        But if one does not know the US Constitution and their state’s Constitution how can they know what is, or is not, lawful in THIS nation? How do those who serve within our governments actually know the Contract they are under? How do the people themselves know what is allowed and what is forbidden, or even what is forbidden except under specifically laid out circumstances and requirements to be met?

        If one does not know our government for themselves, be they citizens or serving within the governments, how do they know right from wrong? How do they know if a superior is lying about the authority they have or if a citizen can tell if the “law or regulation, etc” is a lawful one here in America?

        When we have judges who have been trained incorrectly as to their duties, and do not bother to learn what they are required to do to remain in office – do we send someone to train them? Will they understand that they are learning the laws of our nation, or will ego step in the way and they throw that person out?

        None of this is easy. OK started it out correctly by teaching about the Oaths, the responsibility that goes along with those Oaths. But it must not stop with the military and LE’s, though they are the ones that will be used against us as force. It must also be those who serve within the governmental agencies that are unlawfully using the authority of all three branches while they only have the lawful and legal authority of ONE – the one they are under. As long as those people “just keep doing their jobs” they are a huge part of the destruction of our legitimate government and are traitors to the USA and the American people through their ignorance and on action with no knowledge on their part that they are.

        Etc.

        None of it is easy. I do not have the answers to all, and as we all must, do what I can where I can effectively (one hopes) make changes. There are many things we can all do, from using and assisting the tenthamendmentcenter.com, to Oathkeepers, to the CPT’s, to cspoa.org, to the 3%ers, and support people like Gaven Seim (might have spelled it incorrectly – if so, sorry), to places that fight election fraud, whatever works for each of us. But do something!

        God Bless!

  4. There will be a massive SOCOM excercise in Texas July through September 2015. If it really is a drill, how many vets could be there to plead our case to the troops? What if a million showed up? Could MSM ignore that? Or is this like the excercise on 9/11 where it really happened? Seriously this has gone way to far. Who could ignore this?

    1. I agree.

      If anyone has a family member who will be involved in this “attack against America” please remind them that the Oath is to support and defend the US CONSTITUTION not any person who serves anywhere within our governments.

      J. Reuben Clark spoke about the need for a solid support of the Constitution: “God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run NOT to individuals, that is, to government officials, no matter how great or how small they may be. Under His plan our allegiance and THE ONLY ALLEGIANCE WE OWE AS CITIZENS OR DENIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES, RUNS TO OUR INSPIRED CONSTITUTION which God himself set up. SO RUNS THE OATH OF OFFICE OF THOSE WHO PARTICIPATE IN GOVERNMENT <- That includes the military which is a part of the executive branch WHEN, and ONLY WHEN the congress declares war and calls them out from the Militias).
      A certain loyalty we do owe to the OFFICE which a man holds, but even here we owe just by reason of our citizenship, NO LOYALTY TO THE MAN HIMSELF. In other countries it is to the individual that allegiance runs. THIS PRINCIPLE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE CONSTITUTION IS BASIC TO OUR FREEDOM. It is one of the great principles that distinguishes this “land of liberty” from other countries”. (So whenever you – generic "you" – "just follow orders" or "just do your job" you have broken your Oath and removed YOUR – NOT GENERIC – loyalty from the US Constitution and our country, replacing them with whichever person(s), group, entity, foreign nation, foreign entity, etc who gives those orders. That is treason)

      James Madison: “The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature … the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war.”

      George Washington: “The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.”

      James Madison: "In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."

      James Madison: “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied: and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

      James Madison: "The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."

      James Madison warned: “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

      If you believe that they are wrong or "outdated" then look around you at the USA, the country YOU are/were supposed to defend instead of bring about its downfall by "just following orders" and "just doing your job". It is a police state along the Nazi and Stalin/Lenin Russia lines complete to no warrants, unlawful searches, breaking into our homes with no warrants/no real lawful reasons, look at the military vehicles being used on US streets, look at what was done in Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, look at what people in uniforms – military and militarized LE's are doing. Those actions are ALL treason against our nation.

      You used to have the excuse of ignorance, but even that would not save you in a court of LAW (not color of law). You have that no more. Now when you continue to do those things YOU have chosen to work treason against the USA, against the American people, against YOUR own family, community, state, country.

      That no US President is the Commander in Chief UNTIL the CONGRESS DECLARES WAR. That no one EXCEPT the congress can LAWFULLY declare war here in the USA. It is a "power" given to them, and FORBIDDEN TO ANYONE ELSE including those who are assisting the congress.

      US Constitution, Article 2, Section 2: "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States"

      "The President shall be Commander in Chief … when called into the actual Service of the United States" is VERY clear.

      James Madison, Federalist 14: “In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any”.

      Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 69: “The one (a president) can confer no privileges whatever; the other [the king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies.”

      James Madison, Federalist 47: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny… The magistrate in whom the whole executive power resides cannot of himself… administer justice in person, though he has the appointment of those who do administer it.”

      Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas: “Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”

      James Madison: “Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.”

      CHOOSE DEFENDING FREEDOM, THE US CONSTITUTION OR BEING A TRAITOR and continuing to work to destroy her!

      Cal

      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 who take the Oaths?

  5. At a particular NG site N. of Houston from December to now the yard has filled with three times the equipment they had all last year. What was there last year was Sand Color, no real camo design while all the new gear is similar to US Woodlands yet closer to Eastern European as it is darker. Is this the new design for 2015 and why I wonder has the massive buildup taken place?

  6. Let’s put it this way…..

    It looks great to them on paper, but in reality….they know that effectiveness is based-on assumptions. Their computer models MUST show that Americans are wide awake and those that are not, will submit to their tyranny. The chaos will outweigh the initial threat they will invoke on this country.

  7. Treason an Tyranny comes in many forms, arrives through many avenues and channels. On a rather massive National scale, the crime of negligence, neglecting the Past is punishable by Forfeiture of Future.

  8. United We Stand, Divided We Fall. We are far from United at this point. We need to be together in mass with one Voice if we are to restore the country to the greatness it once was. We need to band together and not just on forums or in cyber space. CPT is a great starting point but really needs to be on the Fasttrack.

    1. SgtRock-you are correct. With all the internal strife going on i.e. white officer shooting black civilian they are succeeding at dividing us. This is part of “their” scheme. We need to pull together all classes,races and religions in order to accomplish this. Unfortunately the division of race and religion will prevent this I am afraid.

  9. I don’t find anywhere in the Constitution that allows for martial law as a result of criminal activity taking place in the United States. Anyone that think that this is true doesn’t read the founding documents. And if our government thinks that they can do this, get ready war.

Comments are closed.