By: Devvy
April 2, 2011
NewsWithViews.com
Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor under Billy Clinton, January 7, 1999, of USA Today: "The dirty little secret is that both houses of Congress are irrelevant." Reich cut to the chase when he said that "America's domestic policy is now being run by Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve and America's foreign policy is now being run by the International Monetary Fund [IMF]." And, "...when the president decides to go to war, he no longer needs a declaration of war from Congress." At the time of Bush's invasion of Iraq, CFR point dog in the House, (now deceased) Rep. Henry Hyde, [R-Il] stated that "declaring war is anachronistic, it isn't done anymore..." During the same time period, darling of the deaf, dumb and blind "liberals," (now deceased) Ranking Minority Member Tom Lantos, [D-Ca] called the declaration of war "frivolous and mischievous."
Much attention has rightly been directed towards the actions taken by the usurper and the bombing of Libya. The putative president stepped in it good this time with calls for his impeachment. Of course, you cannot, I repeat: You cannot impeach a usurper. Should it ever come to that in the House of Representatives, it would set a horrible, dangerous precedent.[1]
Nationally syndicated talked show host, Mark Levin, has taken the position "that the President can bring the United States government to war without the permission of Congress, adding that Congress' power over the purse was a sufficient check to presidential war-making."[2] Levin has attacked best selling author on nullification, Thomas E. Woods, for his stand on this issue, The Phony Arguments for Presidential War Powers: “The War Powers Resolution of 1973 gives the president the power to commit troops anywhere he likes for 90 days. Which is why it's manifestly unconstitutional."
I hope you will take the time to read Woods' column because it will give you a different view of the War Powers Act of 1973 and those who believe it gives Obama/Soetoro's legal authority to bomb a non threatening country. Like the king of gas bags, Bill O'Reilly, who stated on his show the other night that "we have to provide humanitarian aid to Libya." Bill O'Reilly has zero understanding of the U.S. Constitution as there is nothing in Art. 1, Sec. 8 that authorizes the Outlaw Congress to steal the fruits of your labor to give to ANY country on this earth for any reason whether it be military, humanitarian or to prop up dictators until they're no longer needed. Not to mention that pesky little $202 TRILLION in debt for unfunded mandates staring us in the face. Every borrowed "dollar" for that illegal "mission" is more debt slapped on our backs, our children and grand children.
Bill Clinton used the communist United Nothing [UN] as justification for his actions. "1993-99: President Clinton utilized United States armed forces in various operations, such as air strikes and the deployment of peacekeeping forces, in the former Yugoslavia, especially Bosnia and Kosovo." The Red in the White House does what he's told and has followed orders using the UN for his illegal bombing in Libya.
[By the way and to cut down on confusion: Many columns have come out using War Powers Act of 1973. Public Law 93-148, 87 Stat. 555 is actually titled War Powers Resolution.]
There is an internal link in that column cited above that also should be read: The War Powers Resolution Fraud. Those who believe the War Powers Act of 1973 somehow would curtail a sitting president from going off the deep end, it does not:
"The War Powers Resolution does not restore the proper constitutional balance between president and Congress in matters of war. Consider first the resolution's provision that the president may commit troops to offensive operations anywhere in the world he chooses and for any reason without the consent of Congress, for a period of 60 days (though he must at least inform them of his action within 48 hours). After the initial 60 days he must secure congressional authorization for the action to continue. He then has another 30 days to withdraw the troops if such authorization is not forthcoming.
"Until the War Powers Resolution, no constitutional or statutory authority could be cited on behalf of such behavior on the part of the president. Now it became fixed law, despite violating the letter and the spirit of the Constitution.
"It so happens, moreover, that thanks to a loophole in the resolution, the 60-day clock begins only if and when the president reports to Congress under Section 4(a)(1) of the Resolution. Surprise, surprise: presidents have therefore reported to Congress in a more generic manner rather than expressly under that section. They issue reports "consistent with" rather than "pursuant to" the Resolution.
"Even still, in a few cases presidents have acted as if the 60-day limit were in effect, perhaps out of political considerations (even if from a strictly legal point of view it was not). But Bill Clinton's multi-year military intervention in Bosnia alone, without even so much as a nod in the direction of Congress, made perfectly clear that the resolution, whatever good points may be buried within it, was effectively a dead letter."
There are some writers who have made the argument that the War Powers Resolution is constitutional because it was passed by the U.S. Congress. So was the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and if there ever was an unconstitutional Act, that one is number one. The Outlaw Congress also passed the Brady "Law"; it was later gutted by the U.S. Supreme Court, same as the recent decision by Federal Judge Vinson in Florida regarding CommieCare (aka Obama Care).
John Adams had this to say in 1774 - a perfect summation of where we are because of unconstitutional laws and the War and Emergency Powers Act of 1933, propped up by activist judges and accepted by the people of this nation out of ignorance, apathy, greed or lust for power:
"Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers, and destroyers press upon them so fast, that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon the American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the pensioners urge for more revenue. The people grow less steady, spirited, and virtuous, the seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and expectants, until virtue, integrity, public spirit, simplicity, and frugality, become the objects of ridicule and scorn, and vanity, luxury, foppery, selfishness, meanness, and downright venality swallow up the whole society."
I know time is an issue for everyone, but if we are to fully understand important legal questions like where does the authority exist for a legitimate president to simply bomb another country without a declaration of war, you have to take the time to go back and read the "laws" and other documented historical facts. Both Levin and Woods bring up the Federalist Papers, which like millions of others, I have read. Woods cites from delegates at the Constitutional Convention. Unlike tens of millions of Americans, I have actually finished reading the three volume, 1,800 pages titled: The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 by Max Farrand. Woods is right, Levin is wrong.
War & Emergencies
"I think of all the damnable heresies that have ever been suggested in connection with the Constitution, the doctrine of emergency is the worst. It means that when Congress declares an emergency, there is no Constitution. This means its death. It is the very doctrine that the German chancellor is invoking today in the dying hours of the parliamentary body of the German republic, namely, that because of an emergency, it should grant to the German chancellor absolute power to pass any law, even though the law contradicts the Constitution of the German republic. Chancellor Hitler is at least frank about it. We pay the Constitution lip-service, but the result is the same." Congressman James Beck, 1933
Do you know there is another War Powers Act? There is and it goes further back than 1973. Why do you need to know this? Because it's crucial to understanding the destruction to our rights and freedoms. That particular act is called The War and Emergency Powers Act of 1933. In order to fully appreciate just how heinous that "Act" is, you have to do the research. Because those acts of Congress were carefully crafted propaganda to support the destruction of your rights, it can become overwhelming due to all the language and references to other statutes and laws. However, I am providing you with the links below that will give you a full and complete understanding of the issue with a few hours of your time invested.
As a veteran in the trenches for going on 21 years full time, regrettably, I see good intentioned Americans continue to chase smoke in the wind because they do not know (as I did not until I took the time) the origins of our ills and so continue to pursue Band Aids instead of the cure. Instead of cutting out the cancer, they continue to cheer on the very people, the corrupt political animals in the U.S. Congress and uninformed in the state capitols, who have allowed things to fester for decades. I do not say that with arrogance because I know something you might not, but rather because it's very frustrating to see people try so hard, but make so little progress. Until we attack the growth of tyranny at the root, it will continue to grow branches choking us to death.
Full article HERE
Great post!
ReplyDelete