Department of Homeland Security: Marginalizing Our Military

In recent interviews after last week's Tea Parties conducted throughout the nation, much media spin and reporting has been done with respect to one group of individuals who were targeted as "potential terrorists" according to the Department of Homeland Security's "right wing extremism" memorandum issued prior to these events.

The focus which has occurred has primarily been directed toward the returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans and, as Ms. Napolitano commented, their susceptibility to being recruited by some of these "right wing organizations." The marginalizing of the entire Catholic faith (an anti-abortion "one issue" group primarily also) has not been addressed, nor the marginalizing of citizens who have been the victims of illegal immigrant crime and theft in this country nor those that hold with the Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment provisions who also were barely even given a nod. And a host of others who cannot in any way be categorized as affiliated with Ms. Napolitano or the Department's definition of "right wing."

This attempt at what is no more than mass propaganda and terrorism in and of itself, and marginalizing our military as potential terrorists or suscepitible to supposed "right wing extremist" ideology as defined by the Department can only be due to one agenda, and one only. An attempt to silence some of those returning veterans who just may have some more truthful information about what is really going on in Iraq and Afghanistan differing from what our mainstream media pundits have presented. Or discredit those outraged at this point with their multiple tours of duty contrary to their understanding when first enlisting for this "mission" back in 2001 and the direction it then subsequently took.

Or in order to minimize the sacrifices of those men and women who are now being reported by Ms. Napolitano's very own Department of Homeland Security whose agents are now detaining and holding for military trials at border checkpoints along the Canadian border some of those misled soldiers who are now refusing to return to their active duty after multiple tours these past seven years. I received two such reports of these detentions and "arrest" within the past 30 days since as a border security activist, I registered and receive the DHS builletins daily.

If we can marginalize those returning war veterans, then we can also eventually deny them future benefits, and also continue the Washington "spins" with respect to this ever-increasing war now under the Obama Administration, in direct opposition to his stated intentions during that two year run for office. And some of their stories when they return as unworthy of credence if contrary to governmental press releases and spins this past seven years.

The candidate who painted himself as the agent for "change" and the "Anti-Bush" who has now spent more under that unaccountable bank bailout he was instrumental in passing with those others in Washington, has now instead enlarged the number of troops and war in simply moving the troops around the Middle Eastern chessboard and its funding in the budget and a recent supplemental appropriations bill, and also now plunged this nation into more debt than the last four presidents combined.

While having an inaugural that puts some of the coronations of the Crown Heads of Europe to shame during a time when this country continued to further sink into the economic quagmire Washington itself created which reached a manufactured bank "crisis" when Mr. Obama was a member of the Senate Club in the Bush Administration. With all the "crisis" that have occurred within the past eight years alone now in this country, I'm wondering if all of them don't simply work for the networks and their owners under contract for ratings and their advertising revenue.

And then once elected, simply began his domestic and foreign carbon emitting, energy depleting and expensive road trips to sell the American people on Washington's ever increasingly outrageous "fixes" and policies, and apologizing to the globe, even a Saudi King, whose citizens were reported and responsible for the largest massive attack and civilian casualties in this country post World War II.

So how low can Washington continue to go in now not only declaring war on the majority of Americans in this "terrorist" bulletin, but also declaring war on its own military veterans?

"Mea culpas" are not going to get you out of this one, Washington bureaucrats. Public apologies to every single American in this country by the President, Vice President and all 535 members of Congress and federal bureaucracy and resignation at this point just might do it. But only might.

After all, the Sergeant-at-Arms in both the House and Senate are there for a reason and function, and this position is not simply a ceremonial one.

U.S. Constitution is De Facto Law of the Land

Below is an excerpt from the Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 256, which affirms that the U.S. Constitution, unless and until LAWFULLY amended as contained within it's express provisions, is a contract between the federal and state government and it's people, and the defacto Law of the Land.

As a contract itself and in spite of U.S. history almost from the moment it was ratified by the 13 original colonies, any and all interpretations or applications of the provisions contained within it under the "common law" upon which contract law is based according to the Magna Carta (used by the founders in their deliberations) by any and all judicial authorities at both the state and federal level is to be done using the "common useage" English definitions in such interpretations or applications pursuant to "contract law doctrine." The footnote citations relate to U.S. case law which enforces this restatement and can be researched after pulling up the Am.Jur citing for a listing of footnoted case laws at any local law library:

Section 256. Generally.

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, whether federal [29] or state, [30] though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, [31] but is wholly void, [32] and ineffective for any purpose; [33] since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it, [34] an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. [31] Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. [36] No repeal of such an enactment is necessary. [37]

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, [38] confers no rights, [39] creates no office, [40] bestows no power or authority on anyone, [41] affords no protection, [42] and justifies no acts performed under it. [43] A contract which rests on an unconstitutional statute creates no obligation to be impaired by subsequent legislation. [44]

No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law [45] and no courts are bound to enforce it. [46] Persons convicted and fined under a statute subsequently held unconstitutional may recover the fines paid. [47]

A void act cannot be legally inconsistent with a valid one. [48] And an unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. [49] Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. [50] Since an unconstitutional statute cannot repeal or in any way affect an existing one, [51] if a repealing statute is unconstitutional, the statute which it attempts to repeal remains in full force and effect. [52] And where a clause repealing a prior law is inserted in an act, which act is unconstitutional and void, the provision for the repeal of the prior law will usually fall with it and will not be permitted to operate as repealing such prior law. [53]

The general principles stated above apply to the constitutions as well as to the laws of the several states insofar as they are repugnant to the Constitution and laws of the United States. [54] Moreover, a construction of a statute which brings it in conflict with a constitution will nullify it as effectually as if it had, in express terms, been enacted in conflict therewith. [55]

An unconstitutional portion of a statute may be examined for the purpose of ascertaining the scope and effect of the valid portions. [56]

The numbers in [brackets] are footnotes that refer to court decisions. You can look them up in the American Jurisprudence at any law library.

Juries in the United States have the right and power to judge the law as well as the facts. This means that a jury can acquit a defendant for any reason or none and need not give any reason for it's decision. Therefor bad statutes that are unconstitutional or immoral can be set aside, or good laws that are misapplied can be ignored. This is called "jury nullification."

Florida Town Denies Right to Assemble

Apparently with the recent state of affairs in the United States with Americans outraged at Washington for the continuing war in the Middle East most expanding under the Obama Administration, any and all campaign representations to the contrary, our unsecured borders and a potential war now raging in the border states due to federal negligence post 9/11, and the recent bailouts and handouts which also occurred recently that risk America's economic future now for several generations, a Tea Party protesting such actions scheduled for this weekend was cancelled.

The reason for the cancellation?

The City of Cape Coral, Florida was concerned that there would be too many attendees for the City to handle. Oh, and the required permits and insurance costs for such a gathering needed to be scheduled and paid in advance.

While American citizen's Bill of Rights freedoms are under attack as never before, until amended states that the "right of the people to assemble shall not be abridged". The federal, state and local governments continue in their creative methods to both undermine and negate the government that our forefathers fought in order to secure. And pay lip service then every 4th of July but apparently have no real concept of just what those freedoms and "inalienable" rights as included in those Bill of Rights really mean for American citizens.

The details and excuses given for the cancellation can be found at:

http://www.winknews.com/news/local/42019772.html