NDAA Is A Hoax: You Can’t Legalize Tyranny

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
"The establishment occupying Washington have pulled a hoax on The People in violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights to enslave them."

One of the nation’s most well known legal precedents, Marbury vs. Madison, decided in 1803, makes clear that any “law” that is “repugnant to the Constitution is null and void.”


www.infowars.com...

Not that those in power care, but this NDAA should be ringing alarm bells for those who still think the Government has American citizens best interests at heart. Its so obvious that the NDAA flies in the face of the constitution that I personally believe by signing it and even voting for it, is literally an act of treason. In fact I think it is 100% definately a treasonous act, to leterally take away the rights of the people of a country is totally outrageous and if people do not stand up to this NDAA bill then America is no more, period. It is the duty of every American to bring this tyranny to a halt, freedom comes at a price and is sometimes expensive, but not paying that price will be far more expensive. As for the NDAA,

It should be the responsibility of every Sherriff in the USA to put those who voted and signed this bill in Jail. After which the bankers should be dealt with very harshly.




posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
NDAA is definitely the most UnAmerican act passed yet, even more than the Patriot Act,...... but then again our president is named Barack Hussein Obama, that's as UnAmerican as it gets



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
As far as Im concerned, all of congress should be rounded up, tried for treason, and put away for a long time.

If George Washington, James Madison, or any of the founding fathers were here today, they would be utterly disgusted, then the government would probably arrest them indefinetly.

scary times we live in.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Sadly it isn't a hoax, it's all too real. The people are too dumbed down to give a crap.

And no, there will be no insurrection when their friends and neighbors start getting locked up. They'll just believe that person was an "enemy of state"... "the government wouldn't lie to us, they wanna keep us safe"....

It's a wrap...



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I ask of one thing do not confuse the sheepeople, NDAA2012 is not bad in it self the part that is, is Sub Sec D 1021 1022, , it is like all laws , do not effect till you break them , J walking is against the law, so is drunk driving.
This makes protesting and going on strike , supporting anti GOV or saying something bad against the GOV, that would in the end, give aid to the enemy,or acting in a hostile and or belligerent manner as well will get you a one way ticket to git mo, no proof needed. All it takes is one to say look he /she did this, 54 days till it takes effect so enjoy your free speech while you can.
Mighty King Obama is getting his list and checking it 3 times before saying, go seek them out for they do not bow down to me. will you be one to bow down?
I ask an other where were you when this came to be? www.aclu.org... from the link

PUBLIC LAW 107–56—OCT. 26, 2001
do not what that is , you should it is the "P" act, for this was the start of it all ,... but is does not effect me ? oh yea TSA, DHS, NSA, CIA, FEMA, all effect you in some way , does the words 'Your with us or against us " ring a bell?
edit on 5-1-2012 by bekod because: editting
edit on 5-1-2012 by bekod because: editting



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Today everything is upside down, wrong is right, less is more, bad is good, the innocent are criminals, hoax is law.

You aint seen nothing yet.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Then the question has to come to mind. Do we let this happen, or do we take a stand at some point?



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
To politicize this topic if the NDAA was passed under Bush they would be screaming bloody murder about it but hey the Obama is trying to keep you safe so he gets a free pass like they always get.

They didn't repeal the Patriot Act but expanded its powers and the created this monstrosity the double standards of the past 3 years is sickening.

Oh tyranny has been legalized for decades under the guise of doing goodness and joy its only a talking point and fascism when there is and R by there names.
edit on 5-1-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Yeah try arguing that when they kick down your door and kidnap you.

You can't reason with tyrants or thugs in uniforms.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
The real crime is that the vast majority of those in Congress have no idea of what was in the NDAA or sections 1031 and 1032, or any other bill they vote on. They just vote the way their political "leaders" and lobbyists tell them to vote. The entire government is just a big game to them, and they could care less about any of us. They believe we are too ignorant to care or understand, and perhaps we are. After all, we "voted" them into office, although in reality, all elections are rigged.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by heyitsphil
As far as Im concerned, all of congress should be rounded up, tried for treason, and put away for a long time.

If George Washington, James Madison, or any of the founding fathers were here today, they would be utterly disgusted, then the government would probably arrest them indefinetly.

scary times we live in.


I have been saying that for a long time now. And, wishing it would happen. Arrest and Trial are the only way to pry them from those seats. I also believe the Original Thirteenth Article of Amendment should be reinstated, and anyone who holds Public Office and is a Lawyer should be barred from that office. No Lawyers in Government!

The reporting of lawlessness within the executive branch of our national government has been held a duty of government lawyers that even trumps a President’s claim of attorney-client privilege.
In re Lindsey, 332 U.S. App. D.C. 357, 158 F.3d 1263, 1273 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (“If there is wrongdoing in government, it must be exposed.”) (Click here for the opinion in PDF format.) PDF

Government lawbreaking is lucrative business for lawyers. Indeed, government is America’s biggest lawbreaker. There isn’t even a close second to government as society’s biggest lawbreaker. Government is also America’s oldest lawbreaker. America’s greatest contribution to the law is its written Constitution, which has been described in various ways, such as a compact or a living document. However, the better description of the Constitution may be that it is the law that Governs Government.

The Constitution is paramount law that creates a structure of republican government designed best to secure American liberties. It has been tattered, almost beyond repair.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
I know this sounds crazy, so please bear with me.

I'm hoping that someone gets picked up under this law, and soon. Their are only two ways to stop this law, either repeal it, or have it declared unconstitutional by the appropriate court. You know there are lawyers already preparing briefs to defend the first peron who gets charged, and a writ of habeas corpus will be only minutes away.

Obama doesn't want to repeal it, he'll veto the attempt. If he stays in office, he'll appoint Supreme Court Justices that will agree with him. That's why I want the test soon.

As far as arresting him and the congressmen who voted for it, I truly understand, but it won't happen. The law's not unconstitutional until it's declared unconstitutional.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   


Obama doesn't want to repeal it, he'll veto the attempt. If he stays in office, he'll appoint Supreme Court Justices that will agree with him. That's why I want the test soon.
reply to post by charles1952
 


Just remember...not only is "our" president a lawyer...he is a CONSTITUTIONAL Lawyer, and knows how to circumvent the law of the land, in ways we laymen have no idea of, and still be within the confines of the law.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   
The decision as to the "constitutionality" is to be made by the Supreme Court tho (even if "self evident"). Therefore, despite how one feels, one can not have the legislators arrested just for passing the law...untested. However, it can also be argued that the planning of a flagrantly unconstitutional law constitutes a conspiracy to commit treason. Domestic enemies of the US Constitution are the real "tyrrorists"* are they not?

* tyranny + terrorists = tyrrorists



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 

PS The irony is that Obama has stated that he already has the authority to indefinitely arrest US Citizens on terrorist related charges - without the NDAA.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 




But when a long train of abuses and usurpation's, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.


declaration of independance

And now they have declared us terrorist if we even entertain these rights?


edit on 5-1-2012 by Andronian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


How does our POTUS having a foreign sounding name be UnAmerican?

Explain yourself buddy!



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 

Dear CosmicCitizen,

That's some great thinking! Well done. I don't remember what kind of immunity congressmen have for their votes, but what if SCOTUS were to say in their holding "This is the most unconstitutional piece of trash ever. It should have been evident to anyone old enough to read." Then.....

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   
You guys are working under the assumption that the SCOTUS would declare this unconstitutional.

Not likely.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   
So I have a question about the NDAA that maybe the members of these forums can answer for me. There's all this talk about how it doesn't exclude American Citizens but I found this in the bill.


SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.


So.... this specifically states that the NDAA detention doesn't apply to US citizens, right? Am I missing something here? I read section 1031 and it doesn't exclude Americans but section 1032 seems to exclude American citizens.

I do not support the NDAA by any means but I am just trying to get a better understanding of this.





top topics
 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join