Liberty Forged

the State has no money of its own, so it has no power of its own. ` Nock

Posts Tagged ‘terrorist’

Libertarians are terrorists and the Constitution is a terrorist document

Posted by Jesse on March 13, 2009

My initial reaction was laughter. I mean this has got to be a joke right? Somebody’s just playing the hand a bit too far?

Sodahead.com reads:

The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and 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.

I am reading the whole thing now. I’d actually seen a similar brochure months ago, but I didn’t take it seriously then because of the absurdity. So upon reading about such nonsense again I thought it to be old news. Let’s hope it is and that it’s not for real. Unfortunately this document is dated Feb 20, 2009. Allegedly a spokesman from the office claimed it was just part of a training exercise. Mmhmm.

This “leaked” document allegedly came from this office in Missouri: the MIAC.

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s tour of Missouri’s “fusion center” on March 11 was her first visit to a state fusion center since joining President Barack Obama’s Cabinet. Governor Jay Nixon briefed Napolitano on the workings of the fusion center, known as the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC).

pic1

Sec. Napolitano and Gov. Nixon then traveled to Kansas City to address the National Fusion Center Conference. Fusion centers are collaborative efforts by law enforcement and other agencies to pool information, resources and analysis to better address and detect crime and potential terrorist threats. Napolitano called fusion centers, which often receive federal funding and work with federal agencies, “the future of law enforcement.”

I think Obama has some explaining to do. The first question should be: When did the Constitution become an illegal, or terrorist,  document?

——————————————-

Posted in Mine | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Protect America Act, (i.e., Protect Government Act)

Posted by Jesse on March 14, 2008

“To declare that in the administration of criminal law the end justifies the means — to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure conviction of a private criminal — would bring terrible retribution.”
— Justice Louis D. Brandeis (1912)

Subject: Proposed PAA replacement isn’t terrible

Legislators legislate, even when they shouldn’t. They do what they do because they are who they are. So it should come as no surprise that the House of Representatives is continuing to work on a bill to replace the so-called “Protect America Act.”

Sigh.

Nevertheless, the current House proposal isn’t terrible. In fact, there’s one part of it that is downright clever, in a strategic sense. Specifically, the new bill . . .

-Confers NO retroactive immunity on the telecom companies alleged to have assisted in the Presidents warrantless surveillance program.
-Provides telecom companies with a way to present their defenses in secure proceedings in district court without the Administration using the “state secrets” prohibition to block those defenses.

The second provision is the clever part. It removes the Bush administration’s argument that the telecom companies won’t be willing to cooperate with the government in the future if they don’t get retroactive immunity for past illegal actions. Whenever the Bush administration makes this argument they must mean one of two things, either . . .

-That telecom companies will not cooperate with future requests for illegal surveillance, or . . .
-They will not cooperate with legal requests for surveillance
If pressed for clarification the Bush administration will not admit that they mean the first thing, the illegal part, so they must mean that the telecoms will not cooperate with legal requests. But why would a telecom fail to cooperate with a legal request to engage in surveillance?

Perhaps the reason is that the Bush administration constantly invokes “state secrecy” to deny the telecoms the evidence they would need to demonstrate in court that they were within the bounds of the law. Sometimes, the Bush administration won’t even allow legal warrants to be fully-presented in court.

The House Democratic proposal is clever because it prevents the Executive Branch from concealing its FISA warrants from the court. On a political level, as this debate goes forward, the administration must now either argue that the courts cannot be allowed to see FISA warrents, or that what they’re really interested in is having future telecom cooperation in illegal surveillance.

We applaud the House for what they are doing and how they are doing it. And though we haven’t gotten into all the details here, overall, this bill is a much better prosposal than we expected.

We think it’s as good as it is because of the pressure they’ve received from people like you.

At this point, we recommend that you encourage them to keep going in this direction. Tell both the House and Senate that you want the following (you can cut & paste this into your personal comments if you wish) . . .

I want NO retroactive immunity for the telecom companies, but I DO want them to be able to present evidence in court that they acted legally.

You can send your message here.

Please also consider starting a monthly pledge to help Downsize DC grow faster. You can do that here.

In addition, on my Sunday radio show, I plan to briefly discuss some of the other parts of the House Democrat’s “compromise” proposal. I’m also going to interview David Weigel, a political beat reporter for Reason magazine. We’ll discuss his views about what happened with the Ron Paul for President campaign. If Ron Paul and/or this House Democrat compromise interests you, please plan to tune-in via the Internet at 3:00 PM (Eastern) on Sunday. Please spread the word to others who might be interested. Reminders with additional information will be sent to you this weekend.

Finally, I’m supposed to be on Jerry Hughes’ radio show today (Friday) at 3:05 PM. For a station list, the show’s call-in number, or to listen online, simply go to AccentRadioNetwork.com.

Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC Army.

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Posted in *Take Action, afghanistan, america, antiwar, barack obama, congress, Constitution, Current Events, democrat, election 2008, government, hillary clinton, iran, iraq, John McCain, Libertarian, mccain, middle east, military, news, obama, old right, Politics, republican, Rights, Ron Paul, russia, senate, society, technology | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

September 23, 2002

Posted by Jesse on February 2, 2008

Will We Bring bin Laden to Justice?

A year has passed since the terrible September 11th terror attacks, yet still we seem unable to locate Osama bin Laden or his al Qaida associates.

President Bush has made it clear that he intends to use “all appropriate means” to oust Saddam Hussein, although everyone concedes that Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. So why is the same approach not justified for the al Qaida criminals directly responsible for 3000 American deaths?

We seem to have forgotten that our primary objective in the war on terror is to capture or kill bin Laden and his henchmen. One year ago, the desire for retribution against bin Laden was tangible. President Bush referred to finding him “dead or alive.” And while the hunger for vengeance was understandable, the practical need to destroy al Qaida before it mounted another terror attack was urgent. Yet we have allowed the passage of time and the false specter of an Iraq threat to distract us from our original purpose. We’re preoccupied with an invasion of Iraq, which actually will benefit bin Laden by removing a secular regime led by his enemy Saddam Hussein. This vacuum may well lead to a more fundamentalist Kurd government in Iraq that aligns itself with al Qaida.

Our troops in Afghanistan, and defense secretary Rumsfeld himself, are becoming increasingly frustrated over the lack of progress in locating bin Laden. Clearly we need to provide President Bush with innovative new tools to bring these criminals to justice. The drafters of the Constitution provided just such a tool to retaliate against attacks on America by groups not formally affiliated with a government: letters of marque and reprisal. Letters of marque and reprisal are especially suited to our modern campaign against terrorism, which is fought against individuals rather than governments. Essentially, marque and reprisal authorizes the President to use private parties to find international terrorists wherever they hide.

Conventional armed forces are ill-suited to tracking down international terrorists. Our military invasion of Afghanistan undoubtedly has scattered al-Qaida throughout the Middle East and Europe. Marque and reprisal would create an incentive for individuals close to bin Laden to kill or capture him and his associates. This method in effect places a bounty on the heads of international terrorists, who often travel between countries, melt into civilian populations, or hide in remote areas. The goal is to avail ourselves of the knowledge and expertise of private parties, especially given the lack of western intelligence in many of the countries likely to harbor bin Laden. Marque and reprisal could turn the tables on the terrorists, forcing them to live as marked men. Terrorist should fear us, not the other way around.

Ultimately, letters of marque and reprisal could help us avoid a wider war by bringing terrorists to justice without the need for military action- saving American lives in the process. I recently wrote defense Secretary Rumsfeld, urging administration support for my legislation, the “Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001.” Unless and until the administration puts the focus back on bin Laden and al-Qaida, the horrific crimes of September 11th will remain unpunished.

Posted in Constitution, Current Events, republican, Rights, Ron Paul | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »