James Lowe, popular Radio Host of the nationally syndicated “James Lowe Radio Show” invited Rose Colombo, award-winning author and well-respected Advocate and Crusader for Justice. Rose has appeared on major and local TV and heard on major radio stations and quoted, as well as published, and featured in major magazines, newspapers, and social media. She hosts, The Justice Club, MWF, 9a-10:30a pdt on Freedomizer Radio. Click on the link below to hear the taped live clip recorded January 2015.
The Obama administration is at it again! It wasn’t bad enough when they ignored all the CBO Reports and reports from the financial experts around the nation who stated and predicted that Obamacare is unaffordable for working Americans and unaffordable long time and could collapse the economy of the United States of America long-term. The 2nd Amendment only provides the right for Americans to purchase consumer products, but the Obama regime, Feinstein, Hillary Clinton, Schumer, Biden, Kerry, are determined to deny the right ofAmericans to freely choose or not choose to purchase consumer products known as guns and ammunition.
Instead, they went full speed ahead and denied Americans their constitutional freedom, liberty, and right to choose which consumer products they wanted to purchase known as health care insurance. Although, it appeared health care costs needed to be addressed, the Obama administration determined that the government could do a better job even though they haven’t been able to help small businesses expand and create more jobs and even though they haven’t been able to balance a budget going on five years. Inside the book, “Fight Back Legal Abuse,” it’s pointed out that it’s dangerous when all branches of government morph into one branch of government and eliminate Checks and Balances which is the case when the majority of legislatures wipe out the U.S. Constitution that they swore to uphold for a myriad of political reasons.
So, what does it really mean when the Obama administration says that they are denying specific constitutional rights, freedoms, and liberties including the 2nd Amendment to the American people? It means that they are denying Americans the freedom to choose which consumer products they prefer to buy with their own earnings and are taking their earnings and turning them into taxes and penalties against the will of the American people and forcing them to buy specific products. (Americans don’t have to buy car insurance unless they drive and it’s for the protection of hurting someone else which isn’t the case with health care or gun control laws).
The Obamacare mandates forced on Americans and the gun control laws actually deny Americans the right of Americans to buy specific consumer products, i.e., first health care, and now, guns, and ammunition, are added to their list of consumer products controlled by the federal government. Yet the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights grants Americans the right to choose any consumer products they chose to purchase with their own earnings intact for 236 plus years. Under the Obama regime, Americans are being mandated to buy specific consumer products after the government takes ownership of those consumer products and set themselves up as the retailers, forcing consumers to buy a consumer product known as health care insurance. They were successful at claiming one consumer product, so now they are proposing the denial to purchase more consumer products even though the purchase of these consumer products, guns and ammunition, are guaranteed as a right to buy and own under the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which they swore to uphold, not deny.
Therefore, should Americans not ask if the intent of Obama and his regime happens to be a goal to control which consumer products Americans must buy or can’t buy through higher taxation and penalties as well as control which consumer products Americans will be regulated and denied by the Obama regime in the future. This raises the question, which consumer products will Americans be denied or forced to buy through the federal government that will force working Americans to pay higher taxation and face severe penalties and punishment like in Third World Nations for non-compliance on U.S. soil, while they themselves don’t touch these laws with their little toes, by exempting themselves illegally and holding themselves above the laws illegally! All persons including all elected representatives and public servants must follow the Rule of Law.
The elected and appointed public servants swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Sovereignty and Freedom of Religion and Choice, not trample on these Rights, Liberty, and Freedoms in a Free Nation operated by Free men and Free women. Who do they think they are when they get a title, anyway? It’s a title, not a right to go totalitarian on We The People and dictate what they can and can’t do or where they can or can’t go or what they can or can’t be or what they can or can’t eat or drink.
The Obama Regime and Clinton Regime as well as the Bush Dynasty support open borders and illegal immigration and therefore, they all must support no-go zones, sanctuary cities and harboring and protecting illegals, radicals, criminals, terrorist and gang members who are known to rape and kill women and children with guns or other weapons. Knives is the #1 weapon to use to kill people in the USA. In my opinion, Rx drugs that alter the mind and make people homicidal and suicidal are the biggest problem when it comes to guns and lone shooters. Most Americans own guns and most Americans don’t shoot anyone, especially innocent people, but criminals do and bad apple cops. Rx Opioids and Illegal Drugs are the biggest danger to innocent people who the criminals hook on drugs for big profits and to destroy the minds of the youth and adults until they commit suicide, overdose, or get killed or jailed. Why aren’t they concentrating on the criminals, gangs, terrorists, and cartels instead of releasing them from prison as Obama and Gov. Brown have done if they’re so worried about guns?
Resist the Federal and State Governments from attempting to trample on the Constitution and Bill of Rights with the goal of disarming Americans while Obama and Holder and Hillary approved of Fast and Furious and trafficked guns to Mexico and allegedly trafficked guns to Syrian Rebels during Benghazi! They migrated radicals into the USA and allowed them to create no-go zones and train up with weapons. They opened the borders to cartels trafficking guns, drugs and humans as well as radicals and terrorist and gang members and the majority remain unidentified persons. Stand up for California, Oregon, D.C., and every state against totalitarian city, county, state, or federal legislatures. Call your reps and tell them you support the Second Amendment and want it to remain intact. Call 202-225-3121 or 202-224-3121
Read complimentary pages of Colombo’s award winner, “Fight Back Legal Abuse” or check out Rose’s political satire based on orwellian fictional characters and how easily a Christian nations can be wiped off the face of the map, “Obamacare, Dinosaurs, Red Necks, and Radicals” at www.amazon.com
Follow Rose Colombo or Rose4Justice Blogs N Radio Shows
Live Worldwide Online Radio: Colombo Chronicles Live! Blog Talk Radio – Rose Colombo, award-winning author, poet, and Host – welcomes Special Dynamic Guests from around the world every Wednesday from 12noon to 1:00 pm pst-usa – Check the time in your state or country – Follow – Bookmark – Share – http://www.blogtalkradio.com/colombochronicles
written by Rose Colombo, original copyright pub. 12/21/2012
Wake Up, America! About 1989, on my talk radio show syndicated in Southern California on KIEV, KORG, KYMS, KGER, AND KWNK, I stated, “Wake Up, America! Wake up all you little sleepy heads out there!” And, I would ask, “Is America on the verge of the American dream or the American nightmare?” But, most people remained asleep to the corruption that was slowly creeping into our courts, government, schools, and churches. I’d ask my audience, “Are you awake now? The time is coming when you will witness the death of the U.S. Constitution shredded right before your very eyes.Of course, many listeners thought of the government topics as “conspiracy theories.” Well, all evil begins with a conspiracy theory and some people conspire before running as public servants; after all, we are our thoughts.
Shockingly, we are living in the year 2013 and the U.S. Congress is failing miserably as they violate their sworn oaths to uphold the U.S. Constitution and perform their fiduciary duty, i.e., control the budget, read and make laws in accordance with the U.S. Constitution and the will of the majority of Americans, which are fair, just, and equitable. Congress failed to Repeal, eliminate funding, and Nullify 923 draconian Executive Orders signed by Obama that deny constitutional rights and freedoms. In fact, the past and current U.S. Congress and Senators and all public servants even at the highest levels are ignoring and avoiding exercising their powers and refuse to ask a man, who was unvetted not once, not twice, but three times – 3X – “Who are you?” or “Where are your credentials?” They didn’t ask, “Why would you want to disarm Americans and arm anti-American nations?” Or, “Where was everyone before, during, and after Benghazi?” Obama stated that he’responsible for the final decisions as Commander-in-Chief whenever he spoke at press conferences. Remember, the news reported that final orders for military personnel must come from the White House before they can act. Its been stated that U.S. military officers must seek permission before taking action against the enemy or they could face punishment.
Well, here are the questions that Americans should be asking of their representatives before it’s too late!
Why does a unvetted senator or a unvetted (2x) US President, which is documented by news reports, believe that eliminating or circumventing or changing the 2nd Amendment for the purpose of disarming Americans is constitutionally allowed when the “Dick Act of 1902” prohibits the federal government, from denying Americans their right to bear arms? Let’s review the following actions relating to the Obama regime who sold untracked guns to untracked cartel members linked to terrorists using U.S. tax dollars diverted from the Recovery Act for jobs. This same regime sent U.S. tax dollars, weapons, and funding to anti-American nations and jobs and technology to Communist China who is demanding Americans disarm! Below are the questions:
1. Why did President Obama, according to Deputy AG Ogden, launch Fast and Furious and fund Fast and Furious with Recovery Funds promised for U.S. jobs with the express intent of selling untracked US guns to untracked criminals on foreign soil? In fact, untracked guns are still missing and in the hands of the untracked cartel members, but the Obama regime, with the approval of a silent congress proposes the disarming of law-abiding Americans, but for what purpose? Law-abiding Americans don’t kill children or innocent adults!
Did congress have knowledge of the $10,000,000 taken from the Recovery funds and diverted to a secret program so U.S. agents could sell untracked guns to untracked criminals in Mexico? And, if congress didn’t have knowledge of the $10,000,000 diverted from the Recovery Funds, Americans must ponder if congress relinquished their power to perform their fiduciary duty and control the purse strings as well as account for taxpayer dollars? And, who was responsible to track the $10,000,000 diverted from the Recovery Fund to implement Fast and Furious? Surely, someone is tracking the budget for each department.
After all, the only people, who ended up “unarmed” were the thousands of executed victims, who couldn’t defend themselves without guns between 2009 and 2011 after Fast and Furious was implemented. The Fast and Furious video of Deputy AG Ogden was seen on national news in April 2009. And, the fact is that there are thousands of untracked illegal guns with unknown locations and unknown owners making it impossible for the government to track thousands of untracked guns. Illegal guns are owned by untracked criminals,so the only people who will be disarmed and tracked are innocent law-abiding citizens owning legal guns. Also, criminals know how to make guns and ammunitions and they can buy them from communist nations and the Black Market.
2. Why did President Obama order 220 Tomahawk missiles fired off at Libya that killed unarmed innocent women, children, Gaddafi’s grandchildren and teenage son, as well as his son’s friends, and freedom fighters? The victims of the Libyan attack were defenseless. Why were the missiles fired off without congressional authority that killed unarmed people who hit national news including women and children. So, why doesn’t the NRA use the photos of all the children murdered in the Middle East with U.S. Tomahawk missiles against the push to take guns away from Americans.
Are people no more than “bumps in the road” or “collateral damage” if the means justifies their goal, but the same public servants exempt themselves from the same laws that they mandate for the peasants. Americans ponder how is it moral and ethical to deny due process of law to Americans while providing due process of law to radicals and illegals who kill Americans?
3. Why did President Obama send billions of US tax dollars to the Muslim Brotherhood and Palestinians linked to Hamas to buy weapons and send Fighter Jets to the Middle East, after he helped install Muslim Brotherhood dictators into leadership positions? Didn’t such action render the freedom fighters and opposition to Sharia Law helpless. It appears that the freedom fighters weren’t supplied with arms, but the tyrants were supplied with arms.
4. Why does the US President have excessive numbers of armed body guards to protect himself and his family, but opposes the right of Americans to exercise their 236 year old right to bear arms as guaranteed by the US Constitution?
Why would the White House want Americans to remain defenseless against criminals who are armed if their lives are threatened by criminals? Guns are smuggled into the U.S. just like drugs. As I stated, guns are smuggled throughout the world in the Black market and sold to cartels around the world, so why would loyal American public servants want to render innocent law-abiding Americans helpless against criminals, terrorists, a tyrannical government, or a foreign enemy invasion, especially since police can’t arrive in time to save victims from armed criminals?
5. Why does the U.S. President and congress believe it’s the right of public servants to carry concealed weapons and defend themselves and their families and simultaneously support the UN small arms treaty that would disarm Americans? The 2nd Amendment and the Dick Act of 1902 prohibit the federal government from disarming Americans, yet they attempt to deny U.S. Constitutional rights. All public servants have sworn an oath to uphold, defend, and preserve the U.S. Constitution. Law abiding Americans don’t kill children or adults unless a criminal threatens them. Senator Feinstein testified that she carries a concealed weapon and she will take out any criminal who threatens her or her husband!
6. Why would judges and lawyers be allowed to carry concealed weapons and hire armed body guards, but not the average Americans who aren’t employed by the federal government?
7. Why did the federal government purchase $1.6 billion rounds of ammunition and sniper bullets recently to be used against which people since ammunition is purchased to kill? In the book, Fight Back Legal Abuse, the author write, “There is no justice, only decisions.”
Obviously, as history has proven, and it’s Eric Holder who referred to Obama – as dictator-like – that dictators throughout history, who disarmed the people and ordered them to lay down their guns eventually were ordered to lay down their lives, and genocide occurred every time, so how is this in the best interest of the American people? How is denying Americans their right to exercise the right to bear arms written in accordance with the will of the people or in accordance with the US Constitution or the Dick Act of 1902? It is not! For only the criminals, government, military (who must ask permission to shoot back at the enemy under the Obama regime according to news articles), will be armed, for once they deny and suspend constitutional rights, the dictators always come back to take away whatever rights remain including the Right-to-Life! Look at Communist China, Russia, Iraq, Cuba, Venezuela, Chile, Rwanda, Germany and Europe! Remember, the NDAA law? Did any U.S. Natural Born Citizen ever think they would see the day when the U.S. President, V.P., and Congress would target American Citizens to be possibly placed on a secret hit lists that could target them on domestic and foreign soil based on an accusation only and be considered legal, so how evil is that? Isn’t that the same as hiring hit men to kill innocent people who may be mistaken by the government or 100% innocent?
Rose says, “And, the dictators said, Come, march to my drum beat and I shall take care of you for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me radiate your naked bodies for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me grope your bodies for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me teach your children how to behave for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me determine your value and worth for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come let me provide you work in the camp for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me tell you what you can or can’t eat and drink or what you can or can’t be or do, for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me mandate vaccines and Rx drugs for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me mandate abortions for it is in the best interest of certain sheeple! Come, let me disarm you for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, let me track you and enslave you for it is in the best interest of the sheeple! Come, worship me, for it is in the best interest of the sheeple!
And, the sheeple did as they were told by public servants. They bowed to their new world leader. The sheeple didn’t ask questions nor did the congress who the sheeple entrusted to be men and women of integrity, but were not for they remained silent. The rest of the story is repeated in well-documented history books. Many sheeple have been slaughtered throughout history because they were disarmed by their leaders under the guise that it was for their protection. Other sheeple were disarmed. Afterwards, they were forced by the armed soldiers to drink the kool-aid against their will at gun point. They drank the kool-aid when Jim Jones and his armed guards surrounded them. They killed the sheeple and even a U.S. Congressman. The sheeple didn’t realize that they were defenseless against an armed fraud as their leader and armed criminals and they had awakened to the truth much too late! After he disarmed the people, they carried out a genocide against Americans. Then there is WACO, Ruby Ridge, OKC, Pentagon, and 911! (This article may be shared, but not changed or Plagiarized by a Third Party)
Folllow – Twitter@Rose4Justice
website – http://www.fightbacklegalabuse.com
Radio – The Justice Club follows C the Power – every Mon, Wed, Fri 11am (pdt) Freedomizer Radio
Radio – Constitutionally Speaking – every Friday 4:30 pm- 6pm (pdt-usa) -(347) 324-3701 – Freedomizer Radio
Books: 1)Irwin Award Winner, Fight Back Legal Abuse 2) Obamacare, Dinosaurs, RedNecks and Radicals at amazon.com
Rose M. Colombo, award-winning writer, columnist, and author, publishes this article for educational purposes as a dissemination of information only, and it is not intended for political or legal advice.
by Rose Colombo – original pub.(C) 3/21/2012 -(you may listen to the archived interview with myself and Chuck Wilder dated 3/27/2012 at www.crntalkradio.com/chuckwilder
Did Secretary of State, Leon Panetta, just inform the U.S. Congress, that the U.S. Congress hasn’t any authority over the actions of Panetta, the military, or the U.S. President?
In a stunning congressional hearing, which included General Dempsey and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and led by the Hon. Sessions, the testimony of General Dempsey and Panetta boggled the minds of the congressional members and that of the American people on or about March 2012. Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, stated that he and president Obama may or may not inform Congress of their actions when declaring war or deploying U.S. troops around the world because they intend to seek a “legal basis” and seek permission from international powers such as NATO, the U.N., or E.U. or an international assembly. Panetta referred back to the attack on Libya when he and Obama did not inform Congress of their intent to attack Libya and assassinate Gaddafi, but the question remains, whose “legal basis” or “permission” did they seek to fire off 220 Tomahawks?
Consequently, Panetta’s statements beg the question if he referred to Libya as justification for his current stance so he could cite Libya as a case precedent for justification of their intent and desire of eliminating the sovereignty of the United States of America preserved as an inheritance by our Fathers, who were natural-born or native-born Americans, to be passed down to the natural-born or native-born children, which should be the desire of all public servants; but on the contrary, it appears that such actions as stated by Panetta would grant absolute powers to Panetta and Obama as he referred in his testimony, not only to Obama, but stated “we” intend to seek a “legal basis” and seek permission of international powers and that they may or may not inform congress of their intent in the future. Therefore, it begs the question if it is possible that Libya was attacked as a test case for future justification should they deploy our troops around the world or attack another nation without congressional and constitutional authority?
Obviously, the American people were not pleased when they heard the news that Panetta and Obama ordered the assassination of an unarmed leader of a nation, Gaddafi, who didn’t attack or threaten America, without congressional authority and without being captured alive and provided due process of law. For if one man is denied due process of law how then should any man be provided due process of law thereafter? The news reported that Obama with Panetta’s blessings ordered 220 Tomahawk missiles fired off at Libya at a cost of about $600,000 per Tomahawk, and those costs were passed onto the over burdened U.S. taxpayers, who are struggling to survive. So, shouldn’t Congress have considered that they should investigate the reckless spending of U.S. tax dollars and the risk to the country’s welfare and safety since they control the purse strings as part of their fiduciary duty? Also, the attacks on Libya, in the name of freedom, and congressional approval cost the lives of an undocumented number of innocent civilians and Freedom Fighters, whose families are now seeking compensation from the U.S. government for their losses.
Did Panetta state that they may or may not inform Congress of their decisions to declare war or send U.S. troops around the world, but will base their decisions upon the “legal basis” of international powers and permission from NATO and the U.N. or E.U. and other international assemblies? Isn’t that like lawyers playing games with words such as “legal basis” similar to Bill Clinton spinning the word “is” or the Obama administration spinning the word “war” with “mission” to avoid congressional authority? Are they attempting to use Libya as a pattern to circumvent the will of the American people represented by the U.S. Congress and disrespect the American people who pick up the tab for their decisions?
Hon. Sessions informed General Dempsey and Panetta that the U.S. Military answers to the U.S. Congress, a U.S. President and the U. S. Constitution. He informed them that the U.S. Congress is not dependent upon NATO or a U.N. Resolution to execute foreign policies consistent with the National Security of the United States
Rep. Sessions asked Panetta if he was saying that Obama is taking the position that he would not act if it was in the best interest of the U.S., if the U.N. did not agree. Panetta commented that when it comes to military action that he and Obama would like some “international legal basis.” He said, “We want to build a coalition – we want some sort of legal basis as we did in Libya.”
Rep. Sessions said, you worry about some “international basis” but you didn’t worry about the fundamental constitutional legal basis this Congress has over the War Powers Act. He said that congress wasn’t asked whether or not Obama and Panetta were in direct violation of the War Powers Act.
Panetta answered that “we would come to Congress and inform you.” He said, we’re going to seek international approval and we’ll inform you. If we’re working with an international coalition or NATO, we will want to get appropriate “permission” to do that – all of these countries would want to do that – we will reserve the right.
Rep. Sessions asked if he was stating that NATO would give Panetta and Obama a legal basis. Panetta said that if he and Obama developed an international coalition – an ad-hoc coalition of nations of NATO – who would give them a “legal basis.” Rep. Sessions inquired as to who they were asking for a legal basis. Panetta said that if the U.N. passed a Security Resolution as it did in Libya- we would do that. If NATO came together as we did in Bosnia, we would rely on that so we have options here. We want to build an international support.
Rep. Sessions assured Panetta that he’s all for international support, but stated he was baffled that Panetta was stating that he and Obama needed an international assembly to provide a legal basis to deploy U.S. troops into combat. Rep. Sessions informed Panetta that they provide “no legal authority and the only legal authority they should be seeking is from the U.S. Congress, a U.S. President, and the U.S. Constitution. Rep. Sessions said he was “breathless” by Panetta’s statements.
Panetta said that when it comes to the National Defense of this country, [Obama] the President of the United States, has the authority under the Constitution to act to defend this country and if it comes – and “we will” – if it comes to whether we are trying to build a coalition of nations to work together to go in and work in Bosnia – operate as we did in Libya – Afghanistan – then we want to do it with NATO or the international community.
So, did Panetta state that he and Obama have absolute power over YOUR sons and daughters, who are in the military, to do with whatever they want and deploy them anywhere in the world without Congressional authority and globalize the U.S. military without the consent of the American people and authorization of the U.S. Congress? Congress is paid wages by We The People to represent Americans, not relinquish our sovereignty and the laws established for 235 years rooted into the U.S. Constitution. It is immoral, and should be illegal and unconstitutional to use America’s troops for deployment anywhere in the world without the authority of the U.S. Congress and in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, to whom the military swears their allegiance, and in accordance with the will of the U.S. Citizens, who must pick up the tab for war, as well as sacrifice their loved ones and suffer the losses when they occur.
In other words, did Panetta state that he and Obama view congress as meaningless and the U.S. Constitution as meaningless and their allegiance is to NATO, the U.N., the E.U., and international powers, not the citizens of the United States of America who pay their wages?
The country is established by the founders who become the Fathers of that nation, such as the Forefathers, who establish the original set of Constitutional laws, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights rooted into the Ten Commandments and the Law of Nations, which shall be passed down to U.S. Natural Born and Native citizens from their fathers for the preservation of the country, not foreign-born inhabitants, born to one or both foreign-born parents, who are known as naturalized citizens and foreigners permitted to settle and live in the country peacefully alongside the U.S. Natural Born and Native American citizens.
According to the book, ‘The Law of Nations,” pub. by Emerald de Vatell, pub. 1758; which is rooted into our U.S. Constitutionand Declaration of Independence, it states, “Right of the Citizens, when the nation submits to a foreign power,” (Chapter XVI, 175). It states, “In the case of a real subjection power, the citizens who do not approve this change are not obliged to submit to it. They ought to be allowed to sell their effects and retire elsewhere. For my having to enter into a society does not oblige me to follow its face when it dissolves itself in order to submit to a foreign dominion. I submitted to the society as it then was, to live in that society as a member of a sovereign state and not in another. I am bound to obey it while it remains a political society, but when it diverts itself of the quality in order to receive its laws from another state, it breaks the bond of union between members and releases them from their obligation.” In other words, the law of the land infers that U.S. Natural born and Native Citizens have the right to secede from the union and remove itself from the union legally and peacefully resisting a takeover by foreign powers or under the U.S. Constitution, remove those public servants from power who have surrendered their powers to foreign nations and pledged their allegiance to a foreign entity against the objections of the majority of U.S. Natural Born and Native American citizens.
According to the televised video of a congressional hearing of March 2012, Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, who answered questions of Rep. Sessions, inferred that he and president Obama had the authority to deploy U.S. troops around the world without congressional authority and they would seek international permission of NATO, the U.N. or E.U., and may inform the U.S. Congress of their actions as they did in Libya.
Where then should the blame fall, on the executive office, or the congressional leaders, for failing in their fiduciary duty to properly vet a U.S, President under Article II; and secondly for not holding him accountable, when he fired off 220 Tomahawks at Libya at a cost of about $600,000 each, passed onto the American taxpayers? How many freedom fighters in Libya depended on our help, but were met with Tomahawks, which created their disillusionment, when they witnessed civilian men, women, children killed as well as Gaddafi’s grandkids, and his 16-year old son and friends. How is this any different then the U.S. soldier who killed 17 Afghans while they slept and the White House calling out “murder” before an investigation took place? At the very least, shouldn’t congress have suspended Obama and Panetta, while congress performed their fiduciary duty and investigated the actions taken in Libya on behalf of the military and the American people as it is their fiduciary to uphold just and fair actions against American citizens or foreign nations.
Consequently, it isn’t just the fact that Obama and Panetta claimed attacking Libya was only a “mission,” but it’s also the fact that the U.S. Constitution requires that America must be under threat or attacked before attacking a foreign nation. How is it that Libya didn’t threaten or attack America, yet the Obama administration fired off 220 Tomahawks at taxpayer’s expense, which cost the lives of innocent people, as they by-passed congress and the constitution? For example, we should ask if the attack on Libya without oversight is any different from Obama funding Fast and Furious under the watch of Eric Holder, without oversight, which cost the lives of U.S. agents, Mexican police, and thousands of innocent foreigners. It is immoral to think, oh well, the lives of the victims, whether legal or not, is worth the price. If the government were to add up the number of people who died in Libya and Mexico at the hand of the U.S. government since 2008 versus 3,000 lives on 911 – what would that number be?
Furthermore, isn’t this exactly why oversight is established and written into the U.S. Constitution? Isn’t the fact that abuse of power can’t be monitored if congress grants one man or 2 men the right to knight themselves with absolute power as if they pledged their allegiance to the British Queen? Obama called the attack on Libya, a “mission.” and said he didn’t need congressional authority because there wouldn’t be boots on the ground and the mission would only take but a few days. Today, the Muslim Brotherhood has taken control of Libya and established Sharia Law, so why did we attack Libya and assassinate an unarmed foreign leader who didn’t threaten the U.S. if we couldn’t deliver freedom to the citizens of Libya? Shall we ponder if the answer lies in the fact that if Gaddafi had been captured alive, it may have set off questions as to the constitutional and legal justification for the attack as required by constitutional law?
In conclusion, if the congress continues to approve absolute power to Obama and Panetta, then they are failing, in their duty to country. If congress allows this pattern of self-government, without congressional authority to continue, which could establish a consistent pattern, it could be the “legal basis” that Panetta and Obama are seeking to exercise and claim that they have absolute authority to declare war and deploy U.S. troops anywhere in the world without congressional authority, based on the fact there wasn’t any opposition by congress or the citizens. This unconstitutional behavior could lead to spreading our military troops too thin and creating a financial burden upon the American taxpayers.
Furthermore, if the presidential executive office continues to assassinate foreign leaders because they “think” specific foreign leaders are “evil” people, then who in America is next to be targeted as an enemy, based upon their opinion? America has leaders, who foreign nations believe are evil, so what’s the difference should foreign leaders conspire to attack America’s leaders if we’re behaving in the same manner?
How then does congress justify that the Obama administration and the 112th Congress is denying the American people their constitutional right to exercise Due Process of Law since they voted to deny Due Process of Law rendering Americans helpless by shredding Article IV of the U.S. Constitution and approving the unconstitutional and tyrannical law known as NDAA? By the way, what’s the difference between a law that allows public servants to place them on a “hit” list versus the mafia creating a hit list knowing innocent people will die without a trial? Even a guilty person should be given a trial! In fact, our laws are based upon just laws that allow even the guilty to defend themselves until now. The NDAA law has caused the American people to fear their government and places mistrust of the federal government in their minds. The NDAA law places grave doubt in the minds of the citizens knowing that the government is spying on Americans as potential targets of their own government for indefinite detention and assassination based upon an accusation only. By the way, how is that even legal in America? It is the love of country of our natural-born and native-born fathers who preserve the laws and pass them onto their U.S. Natural Born children or Native born children for the preservation of our culture, lifestyle, and laws. Shame on the U.S. Congress for not invoking their powers and agreeing to shred Article IV, Due Process of Law, that targets Americans who pay their wages! Americans didn’t agree to pay their wages and provide them jobs and retirement in exchange to suspend or shred and replace constitutional law, but to uphold, defend, preserve, and protect the U.S. Constitution. ***(This Article May be Shared but Not Plagiarized by a Third Party)
Click the like button and leave a comment, please. You may share this blog with anyone and check out my website which includes my bio, awards, videos, photos, laws I’ve proposed, and my book, “Fight Back Legal Abuse” on Amazon or visit Disclaimer: Nothing said in this blog is meant to be legal, political, medical, or financial advice but a dissemination of information for educational purposes only. www.fightbacklegalabuse.com