States rights and militias or defense forces: Is it treason or legal?

May 27, 9:15 AM Cochise County Libertarian Examiner - Jesse Mathewson

Cochise County – An article was recently published by the Canada Free press and subsequently removed. This article stated in bold headlines, “Obama serves 14 state governors with warnings of arrest.” The article went on to explain that Obama and his administration were upset over recent announcements by several state governors to institute state militias again. And that the alleged letters stated that these state “defense forces” would not be “legal” because they would not be under the control of the Federal government. Now generally I am not usually very interested in articles like this, after all I get literally hundreds of similar items daily. However, it came from a knowledgeable source so I began investigating.

I cannot at this time state with any certainty if the alleged letters were actually sent out, though given recent announcements by this president it is not very far outside the realm of reality. So I focused instead on the various laws regarding the establishment of state defense forces/ i.e. state militias. According to the United States Constitution- Article 1 section 8 “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; to provide and maintain a Navy.” The only branch of the armed services that is to be maintained indefinitely is the Navy; all others are to be used in defense of this nation and for not longer than two years following. Now, this is a prime example of how this nation’s leadership has abused this since very early on. Over 300 conflicts “defending American interests” or otherwise noted can be seen from as early as 1836 and before. By keeping this nation in a perpetual state of “war” the military complex continues to thrive.

What about state defense forces, according to U.S. Code title 32, chapter 1, section 109 C the following applies, “In addition to its National Guard, if any, a State, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, Guam, or the Virgin Islands may, as provided by its laws, organize and maintain defense forces. A defense force established under this section may be used within the jurisdiction concerned, as its chief executive (or commanding general in the case of the District of Columbia) considers necessary, but it may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces.” Another point of interest can be directly linked to the Constitution. The Second Amendment is within the Bill of Rights or the first Ten Amendments, legally recognized as individual rights. These rights are also very much applicable to the individual states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…” A well regulated militia is the same as a defense force.

So what do we see, what we see is that if Mr. Obama has indeed sent letters of “intent” in this regards, than he is in fact abusing his powers as a president who is according to every single bit of history I have ever read supposed to directly represent the people, and not lord over them. If Mr. Obama has sent these letters he is in breach of contract to the people of this nation and should be reprimanded. It should be noted however, that I have not been able to verify the existence of said letters and as a result am not able to speak definitively to this. Remember on tiny thing, Obama is avoiding doing anything that may actually show that he supports his role as Commander and Chief - vacationing instead of Arlington...

Muslims demand Facebook adhere to Islamic/sharia law

A comment is being circulated on Facebook complaining that the site has not only allowed Islam-critical pages like "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" to thrive but has also removed four major Muslim Facebook pages with a total of about 2.5 million members. This "chain email" is thus claiming that Facebook has taken a dramatic anti-Islam stance, and the comment is further demanding that the site restore the Islamic pages, make it illegal to criticize Islam, and remove all FB pages that are critical of Islam. In other words, it is demanding that Facebook follow Islamic or sharia law.

While the comment claims that these Islamic pages were not anti-infidel in sentiment, its demands certainly are, and they belie any possibly "peaceful" notion of why these pages should be allowed back on Facebook.

Supporters of free speech are calling for this Islamist comment be searched out on FB and flagged in a show of support for Facebook's creators not to kowtow to censorship and to demonstrate that the non-Muslim world will not be subjugated under Islamic or sharia law. 

Here is the comment:

Facebook Admins, Moderators, Mark Zuckerberg, Dustin Moskovitz, Sheryl Sandberg, and Matt Cohler;

Although you have attended the world's best communication skills courses you have been most successful in growing great hatred and hostility between you and Muslims around the world, but seriously this time you have caused an almost unrepairable damage.

Only a few weeks after your irresponsible behavior during the Everybody Draw Mohammed Day events you most aggressively removed four of the largest Islamic Facebook Pages of total fans/likes over 2.5 million Facebook members. That happened on the morning of Thursday 8th July, 2010.

These four Facebook pages were totally peaceful and free of any hate speech, but you removed it ignoring the feelings of more than 2.5 Million Facebook Muslims and disrespecting over 1.5 Billion Muslims worldwide.

And now since that is what it had come down to you, with your irresponsibility and fake preach of freedom of speech, have left us no other choice other than permanently boycotting Facebook. And now we are giving you a 2 weeks notice - ending at midnight of 21st July, 2010 - to fulfill our demands or else we will leave Facebook....

Our demands are:

1- Reactivating the four pages that have been disabled
2- Adding a Facebook Term that illegalizes disrespecting Islamic religious symbols
3- Disabling any Facebook Page, Group, or Event that shows direct or indirect disrespect towards Islamic religious symbols

The pages that were unfairly removed are:

Facebook.com/Rassoul.Allaah - About 1,600,000 Likes
Facebook.com/Logo.Ramadan - About 600,000 Likes
Facebook.com/Love.Mohammed - About 200,000 Likes
Facebook.com/Quran.Lovers - About 70,000 Likes

SCREW THEM!!! 

I WILL NOT be silenced or be made to sit down!

Warning: Do NOT use the "M" or "L" word!!!

The Obama administration has acknowledged its continuing a Bush-era policy authorizing the killing of U.S. citizens abroad who are SUSPECTED of being a terrorist, in total violation of his Oath of Office to protect the Constitution of the United States and the right of citizens (*5th Amendment) to a trial when accused of a crime.

(* "No person... shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law"...)

The act of assassination is obviously much worse than public outcries against unlawful detention or torture.

The confirmation came from Director National of Intelligence Dennis Blair in Congressional testimony last week. Blair said: Being a U.S. citizen will not spare an American from getting assassinated by military or intelligence operatives overseas if the individual is working with terrorists and planning to attack fellow Americans.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich said it is not much of a stretch, in that terrorist cells have been said to be working within the United States, to expect the administration to conduct these assassinations of citizens in our country. Furthermore it is also conceivable that anyone SUSPECTED of being or acting with a administration designated terrorist organization to be murdered while sleeping or taken from their home in the middle of the night and assassinated.

This is especially worrysome considering the recent Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) information.  MIAC is part of the federal Fusion Center effort now underway around the country.

See http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/gc_

Obama has joined the Bush policy of using the war on terror to violate the rights of American citizens.  The Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report in conjunction w/the Department of Homeland Security  has issued a report which specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, & Bob Barr as militia influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties.

The MIAC report does not concentrate on Muslim terrorists, but rather on the so-called militia movement and conflates it with supporters of legitimate Third Party candidates, Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, the so-called patriot movement and other political activist organizations opposed to the North American Union and the New World Order.

Police are educated in the document that people who are anti-abortion, own gold, display an assortment of U.S. flags, or even those that talk about the film Zeitgeist, view the police as their enemy and conflates them with domestic terrorists like Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph and other domestic militia groups who have been charged with plotting terrorist attacks. FOX News reports, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano called Fusion Centers the "centerpiece of state, local, federal intelligence-sharing" in the future.

Chicago approves new handgun restrictions

Move comes days after Supreme Court

ruling cast doubt on city ban.

Mayor (MORON) "Guns is the problem" Daley

by DON BABWIN

(Associated Press)

CHICAGO — The Chicago City  Council on Friday approved what city officials say is the strictest handgun ordinance in the United States.

The 45-0 vote came four days after a Supreme Court ruling made it almost certain that Chicago's handgun ban would be overturned. The high court ruled Americans have a right to own a gun for self-defense anywhere they live.

The new city ordinance bans gun shops in Chicago and prohibits gun owners from stepping outside their homes, even onto their porches or garages, with a handgun. It will take effect in 10 days.

The ordinance also:

— Limits the number of handguns residents can register to one per month and prohibit residents from having more than one handgun in operating order at any given time.

— Requires residents in homes with children to keep them in lock boxes or equipped with trigger locks.

— Requires prospective gun owners to take a four-hour class and one-hour training at a gun range. They would have to leave the city for training because Chicago prohibits new gun ranges and limits the use of existing ranges to police officers. Those restrictions were similar to those in an ordinance passed in Washington, D.C., after the high court struck down its ban two years ago.

— Prohibits people from owning a gun if they were convicted of a violent crime, domestic violence or two or more convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Residents convicted of a gun offense would have to register with the police department.

— Calls for the police department to maintain a registry of every handgun owner in the city, with the names and addresses to be made available to police officers, firefighters and other emergency responders.

Those who already have handguns in the city — which has been illegal since the city's ban was approved 28

years ago — would have 90 days to register those weapons, according to the proposed ordinance.

Residents convicted of violating the city's ordinance can face a fine up to $5,000 and be locked up for as long as 90 days for a first offense and a fine of up to $10,000 and as long as six months behind bars for subsequent convictions.

Though Monday's Supreme Court ruling did not specifically strike down Chicago's handgun ban, it ordered a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling.

Mayor Richard Daley moved quickly to get a new ordinance in place and has indicated that he expects legal challenges to the new restrictions.

Meanwhile, a northwestern Wisconsin prosecutor said he won't prosecute a range of state weapon violations in light of the Supreme Court ruling.

Jackson County District Attorney Gerald R. Fox said in a statement he will no longer prosecute people for carrying uncased or loaded guns in vehicles, carrying concealed weapons, carrying firearms in public buildings or taverns or carrying switchblades and butterfly knives.

Fox said the Supreme Court ruling invalidated Wisconsin's laws against those practices.

Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said Fox is inviting crime into Jackson County and if he won't enforce the state's laws he should be removed from office.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38061266/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/