|Nationally Declared Emergencies Seek to Suspend the Constitution|
|Commentary/Politics - Editorials|
|Written by Kathleen McCarthy|
|Thursday, 01 September 2011 05:20|
It is hard to imagine our leaders approving plans and/or legislation that would suspend the U.S. Constitution under any circumstances, but that is precisely what has occurred. This is not a conspiracy theory, but very real authority that the national government has granted itself under the guise of protecting the country during a declared national emergency.
After 9/11, a series of legislative events took place, most without congressional debate, and nearly all under the people’s radar. These include the Homeland Security Act of 2002; the USA PATRIOT Act in its original and renewed forms (which removed due process and allows warrantless searches of and seizures from citizens deemed a threat to “the continuity of government” without probable cause based on the Department of Homeland Security’s “Domestic Extremism Lexicon”); the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (HR 5122); the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (HR 4144); the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (HR 6166, which removed the writ of habeas corpus, allowing permanent imprisonment without benefit of counsel or petition to the court); the REAL ID Act (attached to an emergency appropriations bill); the FISA Amendments Act (which gave telecom companies retroactive immunity for providing access to customers’ private phone lines); and National Presidential Security Directive 51 (which dictates that Congress has no authority during national emergencies).
Combined, this legislation is dangerous because it asserts the authority to suspend the U.S. Constitution and transfer all governance (city, county, and state) to the federal government. All that is required to assume this transfer of power is a presidential declaration of a national emergency and martial law.
I cannot urge you enough to investigate this for yourselves. A good place to start is with William Lewis’ documentaries Camp FEMA: American Lockdown and Enemy of the State: Camp FEMA Part 2. Both of these films are excellent backgrounders on how this overreach has been building. Unlike mainstream-news reporting on government, this film actually provides bill numbers so viewers can research the legislation for themselves. Especially concerned citizens may want to investigate if local or state governments are constructing facilities that could be used for detainment, if specific training for law enforcement has taken place to detain civilians, whether purchases of and rules of engagement for nonlethal weapons exist, and if grants have been accepted by cities and/or counties that obligate them to requisite actions on behalf of FEMA, for starters.
It is vital to understand that once a president declares martial law, the federal design is to suspend all constitutionally protected rights. If enforced, citizens can be forcibly removed from their homes and placed in detainment centers; adults and children can be forcibly vaccinated; children can be removed from schools and taken to undisclosed locations until it is deemed safe for their returns; warrantless searches of person and property are permitted; confiscation of firearms is mandatory; personal property can be seized permanently, including homes and bank accounts; military force is allowed on domestic soil; citizens can be forcibly quarantined; and federal employees/authorities are exempt from prosecution for any of this conduct should harm occur.
Any citizen suspected as an enemy combatant or of having a communicable disease, according to a single unelected officer’s or commissioner’s judgment, can be detained indefinitely without charges and without access to a lawyer or family, and/or forced to submit to vaccinations. Children can be taken from their parents indefinitely, or removed permanently, and vaccinated against their wills.
This not science fiction. These are established plans, waiting for the green light. We have many such laws on the books that are dormant until a defining event triggers their implementation. I vehemently urge you to investigate for yourselves. Go to OpenCongress.org, GovTrack.us, or Vote-Smart.org and look up the legislation.
The National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (HR 645) does not require legislative adoption to be enacted once martial law is declared. The president can invoke it to legitimize what has already taken place nationwide – the construction of hundreds of detainment centers or FEMA camps. Throughout the past decade, these detention facilities have been built as temporary housing for large numbers of U.S. civilians. Many are refurbished abandoned military bases or converted warehouses, most of which are located next to or near rail lines.
The mainstream media refuses to report on FEMA camps, instead accusing those trying to warn the public of being conspiracy theorists, extremists, and kooks. In fact, DHS’s “Domestic Extremism Lexicon” includes people who are opposed to FEMA camps. It is stunningly anti-American in its identification of potential domestic terrorists as those who are opposed to abortions, deficit spending, the Federal Reserve Bank, gas drilling, illegal immigration, national ID cards/chips, rigged elections, a new world order, and the United Nations, as well as veterans opposed to preemptive strikes. Also included as potential threats to the “continuity of government” are individuals and groups that support the U.S. Constitution, private-property rights, home-schooling, or gun ownership, and who are devoted to single issues, or have deeply held religious beliefs. (See RCReader.com/y/terrorist.)
So why is our government erecting hundreds of detainment centers on domestic soil? What scenario(s) could possibly justify such activity? Let us never forget Executive Order 9066, which imprisoned 112,000 Japanese Americans during World War II. This event is a very sinister and dark period of American history, yet our current government is clearly preparing to detain hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens again. But under what circumstances?
None of the above legislation defines “national emergency.” It is deliberately vague and could apply to natural disasters, financial crises, civil unrest, or a health issue similar to 2009’s H1N1 flu epidemic that fizzled after it was clear the resistance to the vaccinations was too great to overcome at the time. This will not always be the case. The government is actively securing the necessary control measures for the future lockdown of America once a national emergency is declared, whether natural, financial, or medical.
Why is it necessary to suspend the Constitution, revoking all protection of our individual unalienable rights, in order to protect us? If the government is no longer protecting our rights, by definition it is abdicating its express purpose for existing in the first place.
Once martial law is invoked, purportedly nobody except the president can revoke it, not even Congress. In fact, the national-emergency plan as devised by DHS and FEMA is deemed too classified to even share with Congress. Not even the congressional DHS-oversight committee has access, which is absurd. The Bush administration, which commissioned the national-emergency plan, refused to disclose it to Congress, and Obama, who has advanced the same plan, has also refused to share.
To enforce this overarching authority, candidate Obama made his intentions clear when he stated, “We can’t just rely on the military. We need a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, strong, and well-funded.” Meanwhile, NorthCom’s First Brigade of the Army’s Third Infantry Division (approximately 5,000 soldiers), back from Iraq after more than 30 missions, is being deployed domestically to help DHS and FEMA with civil unrest and crowd control. The U.S. Constitution expressly forbids military engagement with U.S. civilians on domestic soil.
The real hope Americans have against this abuse of power is education and mutual trust amongst law enforcement and the people they serve at the local level. We must elect sheriffs and have police chiefs who are willing to lead their men and women in following their oaths of office to uphold the Constitution and protect the rights of the individual.
Tags See All Tags