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.



page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 07:42 PM
Treason is defined in the American Heritage Dictionary as:

•Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
•A betrayal of trust or confidence. SOURCE

... ... The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012[1] was signed into United States law on December 31, 2011 by President Barack Obama.[2][3]

The Act authorizes $662 million [4] in funding, among other things "for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad." In a signing statement, President Obama described the Act as addressing national security programs, Department of Defense health care costs, counter-terrorism within the U.S. and abroad, and military modernization.[5][6] The Act also imposes new economic sanctions against Iran (section 1045), commissions reviews of the military capabilities of countries such as Iran, China, and Russia,[7] and refocuses the strategic goals of NATO towards energy security.[8]

The most controversial provisions to receive wide attention are contained in Title X, Subtitle D, entitled "Counter-Terrorism." In particular, sub-sections 1021 and 1022, which deal with detention of persons the government suspects of involvement in terrorism, have generated controversy as to their legal meaning and their potential implications for abuse of Presidential authority. Although the White House[9] and Senate sponsors[10] maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act states that Congress "affirms" this authority and makes specific provisions as to the exercise of that authority.[11][12] The detention provisions of the Act have received critical attention by, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and some media sources which are concerned about the scope of the President's authority, including contentions that those whom they claim may be held indefinitely could include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, including arrests by members of the Armed Forces.[13][14][15][16][17]

No one is crying out for Obama's impeachment when he has clearly committed treason against the people of The United States by signing this into law.

It is a firm betrayal of trust or confidence against the American people.
It is a violation of allegiance toward's one's country.

Bill Clinton had an illicit affair with an intern in the oval office and there were Americans calling for his impeachment while the MSM railed against him constantly for this moral transgression. Barack Obama has done exceedingly worse with his condonement of this law. Where are the TRUE AMERICANS calling for his impeachment? Nowhere. Few are calling for his impeachment and and the MSM still supports him like the new messiah.

Where's an intern with a blue dress when you need one...

posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 08:27 PM
I have asked myself the same question over and over again. Why are the people of the US taking this? Why is the Nation that prides itself on fighting for justice, freedom and equality not fighting for itself?

I believe it's total arrogance that causes this.

When I say this I mean that most Americans truly believe that what happens around the World will not and can not happen to them. The attitude that they are right, the rest of the World is wrong.

I also believe that people are just covering their heads and hoping that all the crap coming down just goes away. Ignore it and it's not real type of thinking. As long as there are groceries on the shelf, the car has gas and American Idol sees a new season, all is good.

Guess who the joke is on this time?


posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 08:27 PM
reply to post by SumerianSoldier

I am with do start impeachment proceedings against a sitting president/dictator? is there a way for citizens to do this or does it have to DOJ etc? If it has to be DOJ, then there is your answer, they are all watching each other's backs. maybe those of us on ATS can figure this out and band together to do something? I am in if we can do it.

posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 08:31 PM

Looks like we are sol on this one.

posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:50 AM
reply to post by jude11

In a sense, I agree with you, Jude11, but I think beyond arrogance we also fall into apathy and ignorance. Apathy, becasue as you said, so long as the next season of American Idol airs, all is good in the world. Ignorance because people really don't know what freedoms they have lost. They are teaching watered down history in the schools, allowing frivolous laws to be signed into law with verbage the common person doesn't understand, allowing frivolous lawsuits that further cloud the lines of justice, among other things. I saw this quote on the internet a few days ago. It was attributed to Alexander Tyler. I did some research and it would seem that he never said this and it was put together by someone else. Nevertheless, I think it rings very true regardless the author.

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the ...public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."

posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 07:48 PM
Want to talk about about all the people that helped him get elected when he is not even eligible because his father was not a US citizen?

During a debate (see pg. 2791) regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen. Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor: “As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.” (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872.) Notice that Bingham declares Houard to be a “natural-born citizen” by citing two factors – born of citizen parents in the US. John Bingham, aka “father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins. Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor: “All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)) Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor: “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
reply to post by SumerianSoldier

new topics

top topics

log in