Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Every time Congress meets they take away more of our liberties.
March 8, 2012 H.R. 347 was signed by the constitutional law professor, Barack Obama. It is cleverly worded to make perfect sense, but there are some parts I have a problem with.
Don’t we already have enough laws? Isn’t it already illegal to trespass or commit violent acts against other people? Why do we need duplicate, superfluous laws?
They use the law to break the law.
H.R. 347 states:
‘‘(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
‘‘(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive
conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
‘‘(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds… shall be punished…
‘‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area—
‘‘(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
‘‘(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.” – Government Printing Office
This affects both sides of the political spectrum. The side that gets the worse treatment is the side opposite of the party in power at the time.
The law says that you must knowingly break it. You must trespass with the intent of disruption.
This law outlaws protests. Not all protesters are trespassers. All protests aren’t premeditated.
How could Joe Wilson know beforehand that he would need to call Obama a liar? It doesn’t matter though. He disrupted a Government function. The man with the, “What Bill?” sign committed a premeditated act of disorderly conduct and deserves to be Joe Wilson’s cell-mate.
Do you remember this incident?
How many “hate crimes” did you hear committed by the yelling of the “N” word? None. Doesn’t matter. They are all guilty of obstructing and impeding ingress or egress to or from restricted buildings or grounds.
Newt Gingrich and I frequent the same restaurant. The last time I saw him there; he was accompanied by Secret Service. The restaurant isn’t a restricted building. Dinner isn’t a Government function. Many people walked up to him and spoke with him, but if this law was in effect then; anyone who debated with him or held up a vote Romney sign in the dining room would be a felon.
This is just the beginning. Don’t think that they aren’t working on a way to extend this law to protests and dissent everywhere. They won’t stop until they stop us from saying bad things about them, writing contrary opinions about what they do, or thinking ill thoughts about them.
They need you to stay home and not interrupt them when they pass unconstitutional laws like this designed to install tyranny and reduce the population to just them and their ilk. They don’t need you exposing their lies and waking people up to the truth. These people are smarter and better than you. They know what’s best for you and they don’t need your interference while they’re controlling your lives, OK?
Just be a good citizen and STFU!
I don’t agree with him on everything, but this man, Representative Walter Jones, is a patriot.
Representative Jones introduced H. Con. Res. 107, in the House of Representatives, on March 7, 2012.
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution. – Library of Congress
Let’s talk about the Korean “Police Action.” The saying is, those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. I think the saying is wrong because history is going to repeat itself. People study history, and when we try to tell you that it is repeating; you don’t want to take heed. History has already repeated.
Much documentation exists to show that the Korean conflict was the result of careful planning by men whose control extended to both the United States and the Soviet Union. This conflict began with the founding of the United Nations at the end of World War II. The name “United Nations” had been imprinted in the mind of the American public during the war when it referred to the countries allied against Germany, Italy, and Japan…
It was secret protocols at Yalta that agreed to partition Korea along the Thirty-eighth Parallel and allowed the Soviet Union and China control over the North.
Such action had been contemplated a year earlier. An April 1944 article in Foreign Affairs called for “a trusteeship for Korea… assumed not by a particular country, but by a group of Powers, say, the United States, Great Britain, China and Russia.” The CFR leadership realized that the American public might not agree to war should such a “trusteeship” be challenged and began to develop a rationale for intervention.
An internal 1944 CFR memo stated that the “sovereignty fetish” and the “difficulty… arising from the Constitutional provision that only Congress may declare war” might In- oumim-il willi “the contention treaty would overrule this barrier… our participation in such police action as might be recommended by [an] international security organization need not necessarily be construed as war.”
“It is not unreasonable to say that there never would have been a Communist regime in North Korea, nor would there ever have been a Korean War, had American negotiations [led by CFR members] and lend-lease shipments not brought the USSR into the Pacific theater,” commented Perloff…
Russian commanders were running the conflict on both sides. Under the agreement at Yalta and due to their supplying North Korea with military hardware and technology, Soviet military officers were largely in control of the war. Author Epperson cited a Pentagon press release which identified two Soviet officers as being in charge of movements across the Thirty-eighth Parallel. One, a General Vasilev, actually was overheard giving the order to attack on June 25,1951.
General Vasilev’s chain of command reached from Korea to Moscow to the UN Undersecretary General for Political and Security Council Affairs. At this same time, General MacArthur’s chain of command went through President Truman to the UN Undersecretary General for Political and Security Council Affairs, an office held at that time by Russian Constantine Zinchenko. This meant that Soviet officers were overseeing the North Korean war strategy while reporting back to a fellow Soviet officer in the same UN office that coordinated the allied war effort.
“In effect, the Communists were directing both sides of the war,” wrote author Griffin. What past conspiracy authors failed to consider was the evidence that Communist Russia was financed and controlled from the beginning by the inner circle of America’s modern secret societies…
MacArthur, noting that for the first time in its military history, the United States had failed to achieve victory, was later to state, “Never before has this nation been engaged in mortal combat with a hostile power without military objective, without policy other than restrictions governing operations, or indeed without even formally recognizing a state of war.” This set a precedent in the United States which continues to haunt us to this day.
But was there again a hidden purpose to this seemingly pointless conflict, one that reached into the upper circles of the secret societies? A 1952 Foreign Affairs article explained,
“The meaning of our experience in Korea as I see it, is that we have made historic progress toward the establishment of a viable system of collective security.”
So Korea was another step forward in realizing the CFR goals of one-world government backed by a implied military command as with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). CFR member Dean Acheson later admitted, “The only reason I told the President to fight in Korea was to validate NATO.” – Jim Marrs
Failure to prevent a slaughter would have disregarded America’s “important strategic interest in preventing Qaddafi from overrunning those who oppose him”…The writ of the United Nations Security Council would have been shown to be little more than empty words, crippling that institution’s future credibility to uphold global peace and security.
The President explained in his March 21, 2011 report to Congress that the use of military force in Libya serves important U.S. interests in preventing instability in the Middle East and preserving the credibility and effectiveness of the United Nations Security Council.
… may justify use of military force by the President. In 2004, for example, we found adequate legal authority for the deployment of U.S. forces to Haiti based on national interests in protecting the lives and property of Americans in the country, preserving “regional stability,” and maintaining the credibility of United Nations Security Council mandates.
… and maintaining the credibility of the UNSC.
In our view, the combination of at least two national interests that the President reasonably determined were at stake here—preserving regional stability and supporting the UNSC’s credibility…
The second important national interest implicated here, which reinforces the first, is the longstanding U.S. commitment to maintaining the credibility of the United Nations Security Council and the effectiveness of its actions to promote international peace and security. Since at least the Korean War, the United States government has recognized that “‘[t]he continued existence of the United Nations as an effective international organization is a paramount United States interest.
Here, the UNSC’s credibility and effectiveness as an instrument of global peace and stability were at stake in Libya…
NATO and the UN are controlled by the international bankers who are also our President’s puppet masters.
Dean Acheson said the only reason we were in Korea was to validate the UN. The word, credibility, appears seven times in the Authority To Use Military Force In Libya paper.
Why isn’t anyone talking about validating the U.S. Constitution, the credibility of the U.S. Congress and it’s legislation?
Barack Obama must have thought that it would be easier to get forgiveness than permission. Just like Panetta said, they started the foreign operation and then told, not asked, Congress what was going on. Two days after the invasion he said that the UN gave him authority to intervene in Libya.
Barack Obama has committed treason by usurping his powers and congressional authority to international organizations. The United States is an independent nation. We the People are Sovereign.
Impeach Barack Hussein Obama now!
Impeach Leon Panetta!
The precedent has been set. They want to circumvent the authority of the People represented in Congress and now intervene in Syria which will result in Al-Qaeda ruling that nation.
We were paranoid conspiracy theorists when we tried to tell you that the Arab Spring was a false flag operation. We told you that it wasn’t a movement to install democratic republics in the Middle East and North Africa. You didn’t want to believe that we were helping Al-Qaeda take over Egypt and Libya.
Do you want to do the same in Syria? Those who want the New World Order and One-World Government do.
Did you read above about how U.S. soldiers were taking orders from Russian commanders. Do you understand that Al-Qaeda is the CIA? Who is really commanding our soldiers in Afghanistan? If history repeats itself; we are not fighting a real enemy but ourselves to benefit the world’s central banks.
We can not allow one man to have the power to declare war. We can not allow the UN or NATO to supplant our sovereignty.
H. Con. Res. 107 has no co-sponsors. Tell your Representatives to support Walter Jones and co-sponsor this resolution. Tell your Representatives to Impeach the traitors!
If you don’t know who your Representatives are or how to contact them; go to my contact page and give me your zip code. I will tell you who your Representative is and how to contact him or her.
Stand up for our country. Fight for our Independence and Sovereignty.