It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Finally, Action! Ron Paul Introduces Bill to Defend Constitution!

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 03:53 PM

Finally, Action! Ron Paul Introduces Bill to Defend Constitution!

It is the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 [PDF], and you should read it in its entirety: just as accounts of the recent abuses send chills down your spine, this beautifully argued document feels historic and has the ring of great power to correct great injustice.

What does it do? According to an alert put out by the American Freedom campaign, it would accomplish the following:

"The American Freedom Agenda Act would bar the use of evidence obtained through torture; require that federal ....
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related News Links:

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 03:53 PM
The bill, "American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007, was created "To restore the Constitution's check's and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers."

It would not allow evidence to be used if it was acquired by torture, require federal intelligence agencies to follow FISA, create a way that presidential "signing statements" could be challenged, require habeas corpus for EVERY US detained person, prohibit kidnapping and detentions, and a lot more.

This seems to me like a good start to getting this government of ours back to where it is SUPPOSE to be!

It seems like Ron Paul is the ONLY politician in DC that can see that things in our government aren't running the way they were intended to run.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 03:55 PM
Here is a link to the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 in PDF

American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007,

Here is a sample of what this act contains:
American Freedom Agenda

The ten points of the pledge are:

* No military commissions except on the battlefield

* No evidence extracted by torture or coercion

* No detaining citizens as unlawful enemy combatants

* Restoring Habeas Corpus for suspected alien enemy combatants

* Prohibiting warrantless spying by the National Security Agency in violation of law

* Renouncing Presidential signing statements

* Ending secret government by invoking State Secrets Privilege

* Stopping extraordinary renditions

* Stopping threats to prosecuting journalists under the Espionage Act

* Ending the listing of individuals or organizations as terrorists based on secret evidence

I think this is just the kind of legislation we need to get this countries government back on track!

[edit on 14/12/07 by Keyhole]

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 04:14 PM
this sounds very good, and I truly hope the American people will get this agenda in place.
You deserve something to even out your governments lack of respect for its own people.

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 05:44 PM
Looks good at first

Ill have to read into it.

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 07:24 PM
Some observations:

The findings are inflammatory and not required in a statute. Is the purpose here to accomplish something positive or score political points? Maybe we could just try to build a coalition?

The Military Commissions Act should be overturned because only Congress is given the power to create tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court.

With respect to citizens, the Fifth Amendment bars statements obtained as a result of torture because they are coercive. Of course, if the Amendment applies to non-citizens, then it’s a non-issue. Otherwise, I am not sure whether the Congress has the power to give such rights. The federal government should be restrained, that is the guiding principal, yes? So we should accept that sometimes Congress can’t do something even if it is the right thing to do. There’s an amendment process for that.

With respect to § 5, that’s been the locus of the whole argument all along. The Supreme Court MUST answer this question, it is irresponsible to just keep sidestepping it.

§ 6 is ineffective for two reasons. One: signing statements may be an inherent power of the president to interpret the constitution. We don’t know: the Court hasn’t ruled on them. (Of course, I still think they smell to high heaven.) Second, giving standing to the House and Senate may violate the Constitution, because “[t]he plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury - an invasion of a legally protected interest which is concrete and particularized. The injury must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be economic as well as non-economic.” Source.

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 07:50 PM
On the face of it this bill looks great. We will have to wait and see what it will look like when and if it gets out of committee. I'm no fan of Ron Paul's, but I give him credit for this.

top topics


log in