Hello All I am new here but not new to whats going
Posted by Bob Leasure (+56) 9 years ago
I am glad to meet you all,I am from Glendive who's site was shut down just as I was "reaching people".With the passing of S1867 lol!obama, note I will not capitolize those I do not respect.We are in deep trouble,do you realize that in fed court they are flying a gold fringed "corporate flag"?do you all know we have been flying the military flag since most of of you can remember?Do you know what the Peace flag looks like?
Ok to the point,WE ARE IN TROUBLE!S1867 is a treasonist bill,it is a trojan horse,sure it needed to be passed for military budget but the other provisions are Pure Unadulturated TREASON!If we are to remain this country we think we live in we need have our senators tried for treason for voting on this!I can go on and on but you all need to do some research!I am not a preacvher nor a politician I am a Man willing to defend the Constitution!
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9193) 9 years ago
Christmas has come early this year.
Top
founder
supporter
sponsor
Posted by Hal Neumann (+9912) 9 years ago
Oh Cool!
Top
Posted by Bob Leasure (+56) 9 years ago
? Are you saying what I think your saying?I am rally wondering about your reply my friend
Top
Posted by Bob Leasure (+56) 9 years ago
i have posts all over the net youtube I am Ancientmirrors1 i have lmao yes I know who cia is I know the patriot act,I get replies I know who they are!I can read between the lines hell im on a gov't list and am not afraid..I am Cherokee and American!
Top
Posted by Bob Leasure (+56) 9 years ago
sorry I must warn you look up S1867 before you deem me "
paranoid"
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 9 years ago
Section 1031, which relates to the use of the armed forces to detain covered people "pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force," has a very narrow purpose of describing detention "under the law of war" of people who either participated in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, or is a member or "substantial supporter" of al-Qaida, the Taliban, or "associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners."

This DOES apply to U.S. citizens, but it has already been established in plentiful detail that traitors who join forces with the enemy are subject to military law, including detention and worse.

This concern about protecting Americans who might be judged by the government to be at war with the
United States seems to be misplaced, at best, and mischievous at worst. There is a virtually nil chance that you or your neighbors will be swept up off the street and locked up in "indefinite detention" unless you are indeed engaged in war against the United States.

At that point, sorry, you lose most of your civil liberties.

Moreover, we would encourage everyone to think about the oath of office that many federal officials take, including all members of Congress. Remember, they are sworn "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Those who are engaged in war against the United States are just such enemies, whether they are citizens or not.

We often disagree with the government, but that is not the same thing as being at war with it. Let's not scare people into lessening the few protections we have against those who are dedicated to destroying our way of life.


http://www.dailyinterlake...3ce6c.html
Top
Posted by BDrew (+18) 9 years ago
Wait...I thought this was 'WAR ON CHRISTMAS' season, not tin foil hat season.
Top
supporter
Posted by Kelly (+2706) 9 years ago
BDrew

You made me blow cola out my nose! It portents that you are correct.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11757) 9 years ago
Ooo, I remember when the Freemen made a big deal about a flag with gold fringe! Nice to see old craziness never goes out of fashion.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9193) 9 years ago
In the wingularity, all will eventually be one.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17318) 9 years ago
Its too bad milescityhome.com has gone tits up.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4460) 9 years ago
Infragard unite!
Top
Posted by Russell Bonine (+246) 9 years ago
Why do I get sense that this thread is the work of an alter-ego from another B-L trying to liven up the conversation?
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 9 years ago
And it's not even my birthday!

But section 1032 specifically exempts citizens. Or has Sec. 1032(b) been removed?


(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.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.


[This message has been edited by Wendy Wilson (12/9/2011)]
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Tucker Bolton (+3677) 9 years ago
Wendy, I appreciate your comment but am constantly amazed at how quickly we forget that we are all descendants of immigrants, legal or not. Utilizing the, "I'm safe because I am a legal citizen." is sort of a slippery slope. Not for you and me but rather those seeking a better way of life. Be it, escaping the the drug wars raging south of the border. A war fueled by American, legal, citizens, taste for illegal drugs or any other citizen of planet earth just trying to get by.

Wasn't the revolution, led by our founding fathers an act of treason? Had proximity allowed, I suspect the leaders and participants would have been executed. Fortunately for us the Atlantic Ocean was in the way. I certainly don't share the delusions of the initial author of this thread. I do however, understand being tired of placing blame and pointing fingers hither and yon based on dogmatic, political rhetoric, to create fear.
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 9 years ago
Tucker, I was just responding to the information Richard posted. I've not examined the bill very deeply yet so I'm not confident about commenting on its merits.
Top