USofA-First.org

Chuck Baldwin
October 1, 2008

According to the Army Times (dated Tuesday, September 30, 2008), “Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT [Brigade Combat Team] will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.”

The article continued by saying, “But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.

“After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one.”

The Times column also reported that the Army brigade “may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control . . .” It seems that the Army’s new domestic duties also include “traffic control” as well as subduing “unruly or dangerous individuals.”

The brigade will be known for the next year as a Consequence Management Response Force, or CCMRF (pronounced “sea-smurf”).

I am assuming that the planners and promoters of this newfound function for the Army brigade envision the Army assisting local first responders in dealing with natural emergencies such as hurricanes, earthquakes, and the like. Good intentions notwithstanding, to assign domestic police duties to the U.S. military is extremely disturbing.

To understand my concern for this new “homeland Army brigade,” it is important that we rehearse the principles of liberty as they relate to standing armies.

One of America’s most sacred principles has always been that the U.S. military was never to be used for domestic law enforcement. The fear of standing armies ran very deep in the hearts and minds of America’s founders. The tyranny and misery inflicted upon the colonies by British troops weighed heavily upon those who drafted our Constitution and Bill of Rights. In their minds, the American people would never again be subjected to the heavy weight of army boots. Furthermore, they insisted that America would have a civilian–not military–government.

And after the fiasco of the abuse of federal troops in the South following the War Between the States, the doctrine of Posse Comitatus was enacted into law. The Wikipedia online encyclopedia says this about Posse Comitatus:

“The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services … from exercising nominally state law enforcement police or peace officer powers that maintain ‘law and order’ on non-federal property. . . .

“The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. . . .

“The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act substantially limit the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement.”

The Posse Comitatus Act was passed in 1878 and was universally accepted as being a very just–and extremely important–law of the land.

But in 2006, President George W. Bush pushed a Republican-controlled Congress to pass the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, which included a section titled “Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies.” This section provided that “The President may employ the armed forces to restore public order in any State of the United States the President determines….” In effect, this bill obliterated Posse Comitatus.

When the Democrat-controlled Congress passed the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, however, the restrictions of Posse Comitatus were restored. But when President Bush signed the Act into law, he attached a signing statement (Executive Order) indicating that the Executive Branch did not feel bound by the changes enacted by the repeal. Translated: President Bush wiped out Posse Comitatus by Executive Order.

Now, just a few months after expunging Posse Comitatus, President Bush has authorized an Army brigade to be assigned the new role of dealing exclusively with domestic law enforcement and related duties. This evokes serious questions.

Who will give the order to send U.S. troops against American civilians, and under what circumstances? What will the rules of engagement be? How will “unruly” and “dangerous” be defined? How will soldiers be asked to deal with “crowd” or “traffic” control? And perhaps the biggest question is, Once we begin to go down this road, where will it lead?

For several years, the federal government has been accumulating to itself more and more authority that was historically understood to reside within the states and local communities. More and more, our police departments have taken on the image and tactics of the armed forces. And to a greater and greater degree, the rights and liberties of the American people are being sacrificed on the altar of “national security.” It seems to me that to now ascribe law enforcement duties to the U.S. Army only serves to augment the argument that America is fast approaching police state status.

If Hurricane Katrina is the template that our federal government is using as a model for future events, Heaven help us! Do readers remember how National Guard troops were used to confiscate the personal firearms of isolated and vulnerable civilians shortly after that hurricane devastated the New Orleans area? Do you remember how representatives of the federal government were calling upon pastors and ministers to act as spokesmen for gun confiscation? Is this what the new Army brigade is preparing for? And do President Bush and his military planners envision an even broader role for military troops on American soil?

Add to the above rumors of thousands of plastic caskets–along with thousands of portable prison cells–being shipped and stored across the country, and one is left to ask, Exactly what is it that our federal government is planning?

I think there is an even bigger question, What exactly will members of our armed forces do if and when they are commanded to seize Americans’ firearms, arrest them at gun point, or even fire upon them? How many soldiers and Marines love liberty and constitutional government enough to resist such orders, should they be given? And how many officers would resist issuing such orders?

Remember, it is the job of the armed forces to kill people and blow up things, not to do police work. Then again, Presidential administrations from both major parties have been using the U.S. military as U.N. “peacekeepers” for decades now. So, was all of this preparation for what is yet to take place in the United States?

God forbid that any of the above should actually take place in our beloved land, but I believe it would be naïve to not see that the actions and attitudes of the federal government over the past several years do nothing to assuage such fears.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

*Disclaimer: I am currently a candidate for President of the United States on the Constitution Party ticket. My official campaign web site is located at:

http://www.baldwin08.com/

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive_20081001.html

by Chuck Baldwin
September 26, 2008

At the time of this writing, the U.S. House and Senate are poised to pass a $700 billion bailout to Wall Street. At the behest of President George W. Bush, the U.S. taxpayers are going to be on the hook for what can only be referred to as the biggest fraud in U.S. history.

Virtually our entire financial system is based on an illusion. We spend more than we earn, we consume more than we produce, we borrow more than we save, and we cling to the fantasy that this can go on forever. The glue that holds this crumbling scheme together is a fiat currency known as the Federal Reserve Note, which was created out of thin air by an international banking cartel called the Federal Reserve.

According to Congressman Ron Paul, in the last three years, the Federal Reserve has created over $4 trillion in new money. The result of all this “money-out-of-thin-air” fraud is never-ending inflation. And the more prices rise, the more the dollar collapses. Folks, this is not sustainable.

Already, Bear Stearns was awarded a $29 billion bailout, followed quickly by the bailout of Freddie and Fannie that will cost the taxpayers up to $200 billion. Then the Fed announced the bailout of AIG to the tune of $85 billion. Mind you, AIG is an enormous global entity with assets totaling more than $1.1 trillion. Moreover, the Feds agreed to pump $180 billion into global money markets. And the Treasury Department promised $50 billion to insure the holdings of money market mutual funds for a year. Now, taxpayers are being asked to provide $700 billion to Wall Street. (I hope readers are aware that, not only will American banks be bailed out, but foreign banks will also be bailed out. Then again, at least half of the Federal Reserve is comprised of foreign banks, anyway.) In other words, the Federal Reserve is preparing to spend upwards of $1 trillion or more. Remember again, this is fiat money, meaning it is money printed out of thin air.

All of this began when the U.S. Congress abrogated its responsibility to maintain sound money principles on behalf of the American people (as required by the Constitution) and created the Federal Reserve. This took place in 1913. The President was Woodrow Wilson. (I strongly encourage readers to buy G. Edward Griffin’s book, The Creature from Jekyll Island.) Since then, the U.S. economy has suffered through one Great Depression and several recessions–all of which have been orchestrated by this international banking cartel. Now, we are facing total economic collapse.

But don’t worry: the international bankers will lose nothing–not even their bonuses. They will maintain their mansions, yachts, private jets, and Swiss bank accounts. No matter how bad it gets on Main Street, the banksters on Wall Street will still have the best of it–President Bush and the Congress will make sure of that. This is one thing Republicans and Democrats can agree on.

America’s founders were rightfully skeptical of granting too much power to bankers. Thomas Jefferson said, “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Jefferson also believed that “banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.”

Daniel Webster warned, “Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money.”

Webster also said, “We are in danger of being overwhelmed with irredeemable paper, mere paper, representing not gold nor silver; no, Sir, representing nothing but broken promises, bad faith, bankrupt corporations, cheated creditors, and a ruined people.”

Our first and greatest President George Washington said, “Paper money has had the effect in your State [Rhode Island] that it ever will have, to ruin commerce–oppress the honest, and open the door to every species of fraud and injustice.”

If George W. Bush, John McCain, or Barack Obama had any honesty and integrity, they would approach the current banking malady in much the same way that President Andrew Jackson did. In discussing the Bank Renewal bill with a delegation of bankers in 1832, Jackson said, “Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time, and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out.”

What President Andrew Jackson said to the bankers in 1832 is exactly what an American President should say to these criminal international bankers today. But what George Bush, John McCain, and Barack Obama want to do is provide amnesty for the international bankers, just as they want to provide amnesty for illegal aliens. I say, No amnesty for Wall Street, and no amnesty for illegal aliens, either. Instead of sending these banksters on extended vacations to the Bahamas with millions of taxpayer dollars in their pockets, we should be sending them straight to jail!

The only way to fix this economic mess that the international bankers have created is to return America to sound money principles, as prescribed in the U.S. Constitution. This means dismantling the Federal Reserve and the Internal Revenue Service, overturning the 16th Amendment and the personal income tax, and returning the American monetary system to hard assets: gold and silver. Anything short of this will only delay and worsen the inevitable collapse that has already begun.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

*Disclaimer: I am currently a candidate for President of the United States on the Constitution Party ticket. My official campaign web site is located at:
http://www.baldwin08.com/

© Chuck Baldwin

By Representative Sam E. Rohrer

August 24, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

History offers many examples of societies which have sought to increase security by sacrificing freedom. America itself provides many pertinent instances. However, our founding fathers have not left us without wisdom on this issue. Ben Franklin has famously stated, “People willing to trade freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” REAL ID undoubtedly exemplifies a scenario in which a difficult tension exists between freedom and security. By commandeering every state’s driver’s license issuing process, REAL ID threatens the results warned by Franklin - loss of both freedom and security. It has become the biometric enrollment phase of a plan to implement a terribly invasive tracking system, largely without public knowledge or approval. REAL ID is merely the current face of a far larger, international government and private economic effort to collect, store, and distribute the sensitive biometric data of citizens to use for the twin purposes of government tracking and economic control. At issue are much more than standardized or non-duplicative driver’s licenses. This effort extends worldwide, threatening every person alive today. Although very legitimate security concerns exist in this age of terrorism, this Act extends far beyond terrorism prevention or protection of the innocent. Keeping that broad picture in mind, let us move to some background behind the face of REAL ID implementation in America.

The REAL ID Act passed Congress in 2005 buried in a “must-pass” war funding and tsunami relief bill. The little debate in the House and total absence of debate in the Senate ensured that many Congressmen did not realize the full implications of REAL ID. Importantly, the desire by government and economic interests to implement a national tracking and ID system did not start with the REAL ID Act in 2005. Under the guise of security, it has been attempted numerous times in the past, even during Ronald Reagan’s administration. When former Attorney General William French Smith proposed to implement what he called a “perfectly harmless” national ID system as well as when a second cabinet member proposed to “tattoo a number on each American’s forearm,” Ronald Reagan responded, “My God, that’s the mark of the beast,” signaling an abrupt end to the national ID debate during the Reagan years.

The significant opposition to a national ID system in the past extends to the REAL ID issue today. This conviction has united both Democrats and Republicans as well as such normally opposed groups as the ACLU and the ACLJ. Whether the concern is privacy, religious rights, states’ rights, or cost of implementation, REAL ID has galvanized broad and deep resistance, currently including an estimated six hundred groups. Today, over twenty legislatures have passed resolutions or legislation variously opposing implementation of the REAL ID Act. Eleven of those legislatures have gone further by passing laws specifically prohibiting compliance with REAL ID.

What does REAL ID do? REAL ID attempts to mandate a standardized process and format for all state drivers’ licenses to achieve increased security. Most importantly in this standardized process, REAL ID mandates a certain picture quality. A footnote issued by the Department of Homeland Security establishes this quality as compliant with the ICAO Document 9303 biometric format. The global body setting this format, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), is a specialized agency created under the United Nations. Biometric data can be produced from a simple digital photograph of this quality by running the picture of a person’s face through a software program which measures and analyzes the unique, personally identifiable characteristics of that face. The process results in a unique numeric code which identifies a person according to facial measurements. You read that correctly. A unique number or “code” is developed from an algorithmic formula which converts a digital biometric sample to biometric “face print” data. Under REAL ID biometric facial recognition technology, you become a number literally worn on your face - a number which is read by computer, tracked by surveillance camera, and distributed worldwide. Clearly, this international standard provides global compatibility of American citizens’ biometric data collected through REAL ID.

Having this background, we should observe that many Americans still do not know why the provisions of the REAL ID Act must be rejected and aggressively opposed because they do not understand the full implications of REAL ID. Many wrongly assume that the legitimate need for security trumps all other considerations. However, REAL ID is not primarily about a secure driver’s license or terrorism prevention. The full and dangerous implications of REAL ID may be fleshed out through a discussion of why each American must vigorously oppose this Act’s most basic tenets. It poses dangers in the following three areas:

1 - REAL ID violates Constitutional rights.
2 - REAL ID compromises national and state sovereignty.
3 - REAL ID threatens the safety of all Americans.

I- First, let us note that compliance with REAL ID would violate our constitutionally protected freedoms.

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion

REAL ID violates freedom of religion for some citizens by forcing inclusion into a system which requires a picture - and more - just to access public services. The Amish and some Mennonites provide examples of religious groups who view the mere taking of photographs as idolatry. REAL ID conditions their freedoms, such as entering a federal building, upon a provision which violates their religious beliefs. Because this “government” identification system limits travel and access to certain public places, and could even become a debit card, other more mainline religious groups view REAL ID as the advent of the “mark of the beast.”

Particularly because this technology assigns a unique number to represent each person’s biometric face print, these concerns are hardly unfounded.

A Powerpoint presentation from L-1 Identity Solutions, the major biometrics company in the U.S. today, bolsters this claim. A slide in that presentation includes a graph which charts future likely applications for biometrics. Phase 1 of this “blueprint” for biometric implementation utilizes the authority of Federal agencies to impose such requirements as REAL ID. Phase 2 utilizes bureaucratic leveraging on regulated industries to implement biometrics. Phase 3 anticipates mass implementation on the citizens at large for such everyday activities as buying and selling. As an example, under Phase 2 DHS is attempting to force airlines to pick up the costs of collecting biometrics from foreigners at airports. In Texas under Phase 3, a company is experimenting with using the driver’s license as a debit card. Whether one is personally alarmed at some or all of these concerns, REAL ID would prohibit the free exercise of religion for many people.

Amendment IV – Freedom of Privacy

REAL ID also violatess the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of privacy. First, by mandating the collection, storage, and dissemination of personally identifiable data without any informed consent, REAL ID tramples on this right. In reality, this practice constitutes government-sanctioned identity theft and seriously breaches the “security of person” guaranteed to every U.S. citizen. No sufficiently compelling need exists to warrant government mass collection and storage of such sensitive information about its citizens. Concern heightens even further when private corporations control the databases being set up to house this information. As an example, L-1 Identity Solutions houses a database of U.S. driver’s license information. This company, which has consolidated a virtual monopoly on the driver’s license issuing market in the U.S., will handle all private information collected during the license issuing process.

Secondly, REAL ID threatens freedom of privacy because this warehoused data cannot be confidently secured. Even the Department of Homeland Security’s own Privacy Impact Assessment fails to guarantee that the database linking and networking that will result from REAL ID will be secure. Many privacy experts agree that REAL ID will actually increase identity theft! In reality, the database and access to it will create an electronic superhighway for potential mass identity theft.

Thirdly, REAL ID violates the Fourth Amendment in that the process of collecting personal biometric data without consent violates the very laws that exist to protect against such measures. This is probably one of the most significant Constitutional issues. Current US law allows the collection of biometric information only in the case of criminal activity. However, REAL ID institutionalizes the capture of facial recognition biometrics for every driver, regardless of criminality.

Fourthly, REAL ID ripens the climate for aggressive efforts to control the masses via information and leading-edge technology, regardless of crucial privacy considerations. Data collection and surveillance is simultaneously occurring across several diverse fronts, each one a potential privacy danger painting the broader picture of where REAL ID will take us as a country. For instance:

1- In Rhode Island, a school district is allowing a company to place radio frequency tracking (RFID) chips in students’ book bags.

2- Nationwide, Great Britain has installed an estimated 4.2 million surveillance cameras utilizing facial recognition technology to keep tabs on all citizens. These cameras, of which there is 1 for every 14 citizens, can observe a person up to 300 times in a normal day in the city of London.

3- China is aggressively pursuing country-wide surveillance of its citizens using facial recognition technology purchased from a contractor supplied by the previously mentioned L-1 Identity Solutions.

4- According to a June 28, 2008 New York Times article, US and European officials are nearly agreed upon a “binding international agreement” which would allow “European governments and companies to transfer personal information to the United States, and vice versa.” Under the cloak of terrorism prevention, European governments could request “private information - like credit card transactions, travel histories, and Internet browsing habits” about American citizens.

5- Homeland Security Presidential Directive 24 issued by the President on June 5, 2008, “establishes a framework to ensure that Federal executive departments and agencies use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals.” This step shows the President’s extensive authority and disregard for privacy in streamlining the biometric sharing process.

6- The FBI is currently building a billion-dollar database to house an enormous amount of biometric data. While officially aimed at housing criminal and terrorist data, this database already retains finger prints, iris scans and other individual biometrics that the government collects on ordinary citizens. Who knows the extent of the private information that will be stored in this massive database? REAL ID-collected “face prints” are just one more piece of the data collection and tracking system.

These examples only serve to underscore the aggressive global government efforts to track and control citizens. In every case, REAL ID violates the freedoms guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

Amendment X – States’ Riights

REAL ID violates the Tenth Amendment in that the federal government is attempting to force the states to collect private data on their citizens, only to allow that data to be shipped out-of-state and shared worldwide. This action forces the states to work against the very interests of the citizens they are to protect. When states accede to this pressure under REAL ID, they allow the transfer of state authority to the federal government. The separation of powers built into our Constitution then crumbles as the federal government makes the rules, interprets the rules, and enforces the rules regarding all state drivers’ licenses.

II- In addition to the three ways REAL ID would violate the Constitution, compliance with the REAL ID Act would undermine our national and state sovereignty. While REAL ID reads like a manual for a national ID card, the Department of Homeland Security’s own rules for REAL ID reveal that it implements an international ID system based on biometric identification. Complying with the requirements under REAL ID would violate U.S. national and state sovereignty by forcing states to adopt international biometric facial image standards and to document standards set by international organizations.

As mentioned previously, the ICAO, affiliated with the UN, sets the standards for facial image captures (photos). Besides tracking the movements of international travelers, the ICAO also has assumed the responsibility of creating a common international passport system that stores individual personal and biometric information on a RFID chip built into the passport. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), which recognizes ICAO standards, “enables” this scheme. This international body and private organization sets nearly all the standards for REAL ID document scanning, storage, data encryption, barcode and layout design to comply with their 2005 international driver’s license system. Under REAL ID, AAMVA is the hub and backbone of the database system being set up to share information between states. From a broad perspective, the system created by REAL ID destroys national sovereignty and constitutional authority by removing control of government from the people and establishing government control over the people.

Furthering AAMVA’s control strategy here in North America, implementation of REAL ID is “de facto” enrollment of each state into AAMVA’s Driver’s License Agreement (DLA). AAMVA has pushed the DLA, which meets REAL ID specifications, for nearly ten years. The implementation of this DLA is crucially important to the global effort because it mandates the sharing of all U.S. drivers’ license information with Mexico and Canada. This egregious step places U.S. citizen’s data at the mercy of Canadian and Mexican privacy controls, further exacerbating the identity theft problem, and violating Constitutional law and national sovereignty by essentially having states form a treaty with a foreign nation.

REAL ID also violates national sovereignty because any international system includes and requires agreements and obligations that would weaken any sovereign standing. In fact, a Government Computer News report notes the following from Robert Mocny, acting program manager for the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology program. His quote comes from comments about a federal plan to extend biometric data sharing to Asian and European governments and corporations, so as to create a Global Security Envelope of identity management.

“My question is, how is it ethical not to share?” Mocny asked. “It makes no sense for us to develop separate systems . . . information sharing is appropriate around the world.” Government Computer News further notes that he is sketching a plan for sharing biometric data that would permanently link an individual with data that governments and corporations hold. Since both governments and corporations have been infiltrated by extremists and terrorists and since certain governments of today may be our enemies tomorrow, I hardly think that worldwide sharing of our citizen’s data is a good idea!

Enhanced Driver’s Licenses (or EDL’s) provide a further example of the undermining of national and state sovereignty. Citizens that purchase these nearly REAL ID-compliant licenses, which contain biographic and biometric information on an RFID chip, can use them as a passport to enter either Mexico or Canada. This advancement establishes the international ID designation of REAL ID. The Canadian province British Columbia has also issued a new EDL which, according to their website is also, “an acceptable document for entry from Canada into the United States by land and water.”

Advertisement

REAL ID violates state sovereignty because the issue in contention is “national identity management”, with the federal government manipulating the tool of state driver’s licenses. Consider the following statements about REAL ID from Electronic Data Systems, the very company likely to maintain AAMVA’s driver’s license database: “The Real ID Act, then, is about more than a driver’s license. It puts in place a set of standards for Identity Management (IdM) that can be leveraged across an entire government organization to create an integrated citizen identity security program.” The international biometric standards mandated in DHS’s final rules, paint the broader picture of an international ID card for government surveillance and tracking.

III- REAL ID would endanger Constitutional rights and both national and state sovereignty. Finally, let us consider that compliance with the REAL ID Act would compromise the safety of our people. Unlike what some government officials might say, 9/11 and the prevention of terrorism are not the real reasons for REAL ID. In fact, this technology was being pushed well before 9/11. Although REAL ID and biometrics are promoted as the “cure-all” to terrorism and identity theft problems, many highly dispute this claim. In response to the post-9/11 claims of biometrics companies that their technology could have prevented 9/11, Jim Wayman, the former head of the US Biometrics Center countered, “No, the government didn’t have this stuff in place, precisely because it had been working on it and knew its limitations and didn’t find any value for the costs involved.” He further noted, “It’s going to be hard to know how these technologies can be applied to increase national security. We’re not just going to turn these machines on and start catching terrorists.” REAL ID will not assure greater safety since terrorists will either avoid or duplicate a REAL ID compliant drivers’ license, although a correctly operating biometric system would certainly increase the difficulty of faking or forging a license.

Despite the government’s assurances about the “certain” safety benefits of REAL ID, no government or company can create a foolproof, perfectly secure system. A person who breaks the law or who desires to wreak havoc on American soil will find a loophole with which to avoid the requirements of REAL ID. One needs only consider that driver’s licenses on the black market will continue to be readily available.

Further, the safety of law abiding citizens will be compromised as their identities are stolen, stored and made accessible to thieves around the globe. Some people reject this idea because they hope that the government will be able to protect their identity once it has all of a person’s information. The simple faith implicit in this idea is widely misplaced, however. As proof, consider that in 2007, a Globe and Mail report noted, “A security flaw in Passport Canada’s website has allowed easy access to the personal information - including social insurance numbers, dates of birth and driver’s licence numbers - of people applying for new passports.” A breach of security in Great Britain last December resulted in the loss of approximately 25 million individual records. In my state of Pennsylvania, a security breach which occurred two years ago at a Driver’s License Center resulted in over 11,000 records being compromised. Such security breaches highlight significant personal dangers to law abiding citizens and prove that the only secure data is uncollected data.

Finally, REAL ID does not assure safety because biometric technology itself does not work predictably. At this point in time, the technology we are discussing does not work well; hence REAL ID and facial recognition biometrics can not ensure safety. As a result, no one has yet been successfully prosecuted via facial biometrics. The opportunity for false identification and therefore being, “guilty before proven innocent” is great. For example, the Tampa, Florida police force scrapped a facial recognition system in 2003 because, according to a spokesman, “We never identified, were alerted to, or caught any criminal. It didn’t work.” While on its face, the concept of REAL ID seems like it would increase security, it does not. A Privacy International Study conducted in 2004 found “Of the 25 countries that have been most adversely affected by terrorism since 1986, eighty percent have national identity cards, one third of which incorporate biometrics. This research was unable to uncover any instance where the presence of an identity card system in those countries was seen as a significant deterrent to terrorist activity.” The simple truth is that REAL ID cannot stop crime.

In summary, we have seen that REAL ID threatens Constitutional rights, national and state sovereignty, and the safety of our people. The enrollment of American citizens into an international biometric system of identification and tracking constitutes the heart of the REAL ID issue. A secure driver’s license is not the ultimate goal or certainly the ultimate result of the REAL ID Act. And it is unfortunately clear that the ultimate purpose is government tracking and economic control through enhanced knowledge and surveillance through biometric identification and tracking.

This being established, it is clear that this aggressive effort of the federal government, working hand-in-hand with private commercial interests, must be opposed on every level. While Congress must move to quickly repeal the passage of the REAL ID Act, the states provide an ideal position from which to fight this encroachment by the federal government. The responsibility for the security and privacy of our own generation and the generations to come, however, rests upon our shoulders.

The next action to be taken involves the following three steps.

First, Congress must immediately repeal the REAL ID Act and resist any effort to pass anything remotely similar. Secondly, individual states which have not passed legislation preventing implementation of any provision of REAL ID, particularly the biometric portion, must do so without delay. As has been stressed throughout this article, biometrics is the core provision of REAL ID; consequently, the states must move to protect their citizens’ biometric data immediately. This step is critical because the vast majority of statutory law did not envision the breadth of individually identifiable data that could be gleaned by rapidly advancing technology. Further, because L-1 Identity Solutions holds a virtual monopoly as contractor for state DMVs, they could use their position to coerce the states into implementing all of DHS’s wishes. This scenario further endangers state’s rights.
Therefore, it is not enough for states to simply stop collecting biometric data. They must purge and “dumb-down” databases to preclude any government knowledge or use of private citizen’s biometrics. Additionally, private third-party inspections should be ordered to ensure that all measures have been fully implemented. Fundamentally, the states must demand control – they must inform the contractor what to ddo, not vice versa. Thirdly, citizens must play a role in resisting illegitimate actions of the federal government. They must be encouraged in their capacity as law-abiding citizens to whom Constitutional guarantees were acknowledged, to resist implementation of any effort that would compromise their individual, God-given rights.
The American people remain the strongest defenders of freedom in the world. Many in our past have died for the liberties we enjoy today. Most of us are still willing to fight and die today for our freedom and the freedom of our children tomorrow. May we each do our part to ensure the greatest nation on earth remains “the land of the free and the home of the brave!”

“Liberty has never come from the government; it has always come from the subjects of it. The history of liberty is a history of limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it.” -Woodrow Wilso

Sam Rohrer is a Representative for the state of Pennsylvania and a member of the American Policy Center Advisory Board.

For more information on the dangers of the Real ID Act, contact:

Mark Lerner
Co-Founder - Stop Real ID Coalition
Phone: (816) 401-7615
Email: stoprealid@aol.com

© 2008 - Margaret Goodwin - All Rights Reserved

by Chuck Baldwin
September 17, 2008

On this date in 1787, the U.S. Constitution was adopted. 39 delegates from 12 of the 13 colonies (Rhode Island did not send a representative) affixed their signatures to the greatest civil document ever conceived by men. Famous patriots such as George Washington, Roger Sherman, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Morris, Gouverneur Morris, James Madison, George Clymer, and Abraham Baldwin were among this gallant group.

Under divine Providence, it has been allegiance to the Constitution that has preserved our liberties and protected our very way of life. Most of the problems, failings, and frustrations that plague our nation today are due to the propensity of our civil magistrates to ignore or blatantly abuse constitutional government. Accordingly, fidelity to the Constitution would likely repair most of the damage done by this neglect.

It is the responsibility of a free people to jealously guard the principles upon which their liberties are predicated. For citizens of these United States, the principles that duly protect our liberties are contained in the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence. Therefore, it is incumbent upon every American to studiously familiarize himself with these documents.

Furthermore, it is the duty of every American to stubbornly hold their elected representative, at every level of government, accountable to his or her oath to the Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is the contract that every civil magistrate makes with “We the People.” Failure of an elected representative to fulfill that oath to the Constitution should be met with swift and certain rejection by the people at the polls. Nothing else should matter. Republican or Democrat, man or woman, black or white, believer or unbeliever: it is the responsibility of every civil magistrate to submit to the restrictions and instructions of the Constitution.

Our Constitution (along with the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence) was formed, framed, and founded upon the eternal principles contained in Natural Law, which proceeds forth from man’s Creator and Redeemer. No people in human history have ever been so blessed as the people of the United States to inherit such a legacy. Such a heritage serves only to heighten our own responsibility, as “unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required.”

On this Constitution Day of 2008, may this generation of Americans live up to its responsibility to valiantly bequeath to our posterity the same legacy of freedom that was so bravely and miraculously bequeathed to us. For the sake of freedom, for the love of our children, and for the safety and security of our republic, may each of us determine for ourselves–and commit to Almighty God–to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

*Disclaimer: I am currently a candidate for President of the United Staes on the Constitution Party ticket. My official campaign web site is located at:
http://www.baldwin08.com/
© Chuck Baldwin

CNBC host promotes taxpayer-funded federal bailout and Fed interest rate cut to stem financial problems.

By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute

The fragility of the U.S. banking system puts the country in a more dire position than many people realize according to CNBC “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer.

Cramer, in his September 11 “Stop Trading” segment on CNBC’s “Street Signs” told host Erin Burnett the situation puts the United States in danger of “Great Depression, No. 2.”

Burnett questioned Cramer’s assertion that banks should be bailed out by the federal government, in turn passing the cost off to the taxpayer. “It’s obvious the bank system is falling apart,” Cramer said. “Let’s save it before it goes to zero.”

Here is the blow by blow:

BURNETT: But, what I’m writing down is some numbers here – more broadly for the state of, of, of bailouts. You had the Bear [Stearns] bailout and they guaranteed the first $30 billion. We don’t know what the costs will be. Fannie and Freddie – numbers are all over the map, no one knows – $50 billion to $500 billion.
CRAMER: We don’t want a Great Depression, what’s the matter with that? We don’t want a Great Depression.
BURNETT: But OK, then you look at a Washington Mutual, you have a few hundred billion dollars in assets here. You got all these deposits. You’ve got to go borrow the money …
CRAMER: That was run by morons.
BURNETT: But my point is – you’ve got to go borrow the money to fulfill your FDIC insurance to $100,000.
CRAMER: Well, no, you just transfer – you close it one day, like my bank was…. I was banking at Crossland. The next day it opens as another bank, what do I care? My $100,000 was insured.
BURNETT: But, you care because taxpayers are the ones who’s going to be the paying you back for the ones who borrowed it.

Cramer argued it was necessary because otherwise, the U.S. would go into a depression:

CRAMER: We don’t want a Great Depression. I mean, we just don’t want one.
BURNETT: But, are we really at risk of a Great Depression? Most people would argue that we’re not in a full-blown recession.
CRAMER: Totally, totally. John Stumpf [president] from Wells Fargo said it was the worst since the Great Depression.
BURNETT: In housing, but that’s not everywhere.
CRAMER: If I wanted clean hands, if I wanted to be Andrew Mellon, I would call for – I would just say, “Listen, let’s just let the Great Depression, Number Two, happen. But, that’s where we are. That’s, we’ve been like that for a while. So, let’s try to avoid it if we can.

Burnett argued the economy was still growing. After one quarter of negative gross domestic product (GDP) at the end of 2007, the economy has rebounded with two positive quarters. But Cramer said there was a difference between the economy and the banking system.

“Well, one is the difference between the economy and the banking system,” Cramer said. “The economy really picked up in 1936 to ’38 because of armament orders, and World War II turned around the U.S. economy entirely, but there was still, the banking system was still very frail throughout the ’30s.”

Cramer told Burnett he was disappointed in Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who has studied the Great Depression. Cramer added there is a need for another interest rate cut at the upcoming Federal Reserve Board meeting on September 16.

“But you know, look – I hear you on the jobs, I hear you on the economy,” Cramer said. “I don’t really care. I’m talking about a dysfunctional banking system. We don’t want Citi (NYSE:C) to go out of business. We don’t want AIG (NYSE:AIG) to go out of business.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., September 11 mentioned the possibility of another rescue package – this one for beleaguered investment bank Lehman Brothers (NYSE:LEH), based on its impact on the credit markets.

Great Depression references have been used liberally by the media in 2008. Networks have made endless connections to the Great Depression – more than 70 times in the first six months of the year and that’s just on the three broadcast networks..

I felt it necessary to follow up on the Casa D’Ice Address on America (included below in this email) after receiving many Emails from people who did not understand the message. Two score and 18 years ago brings us back to 1950 a few years after World War II when we were without a doubt the greatest and most powerful country on earth. We led in technology, economics, education, military and the list goes on and on. Remember brave men and women fought and died to make this country FREE and GREAT. Immigrants came here legally with their families, brought their trades, worked hard and assimilated to the American culture (exactly what today’s ILLEGAL’S refuse to do). That was their contribution and thanks for the opportunity to pursue a better life. Back in the 50’s-60’s & 70’s companies grew and that resulted in more American jobs and expansion meant more plant openings in other cities not other countries. We then gave foreign countries our technology and the migration of jobs and businesses moved overseas. So while our government opens the flood gates for the loss of American jobs, and permitting companies to move overseas coupled with not protecting our borders from ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS that want welfare, a free ride and maintain their culture without any attempt to adapt to the country that they so desperately fled to. Our government views all of this as global economy. Personally I see this as the beginning of another third world country. While we sell off our highways and other infrastructure to foreign countries we also get deeper and deeper in debt to them. I receive so many Emails from veterans that feel betrayed because the direction our country is going is NOT what they fought for. While our government allows, permits and tolerates the influx of illegal’s that don’t want to assimilate and adapt to our culture would be the same as breeding a pedigree champion and a mutt, the resulting litter wouldn’t be worth much. I guess many would consider that comparison cruel and ignorant, but the reality is that is FACT and TRUTH. If the truth hurts then you should be addressing it.

Texas Straight Talk

by Congressman Ron Paul

Last week I discussed how sound money contributes to peaceful relationships around the world. It is not gold, in and of itself that excites me, but the many benefits of sound money. Another benefit is financial security.
Can sound money give you financial security? There is something very comforting in knowing that what you earn today will retain its purchasing power in the years to come. Indeed, the same silver dime that bought a loaf of bread in the 1960’s can still buy a loaf of bread with its precious metal content – which is worth about $1.00 today. An ounce of gold has always been about evenly exchangeable for a finely tailored men’s suit, which these days is roughly $800. And in these days of fluctuating gas prices, when priced in gold, oil has been stable. Meanwhile, since the creation of the Federal Reserve, the fiat dollar has lost 94f its purchasing . The erosion of purchasing power rapidly accelerated when it was completely uncoupled from gold in 1971. This sort of fluctuation in the medium of exchange creates a lot of uncertainty in the marketplace and necessitates that you either take extraordinary defensive maneuvers, or face financial ruin. Trusting in government for financial security in retirement is not a safe option. Indeed, a recent study by the Consumer Bankruptcy Project shows that bankruptcies among those 75 and older has more than quadrupled since 1991. This represents wealth and savings that have been eroded by inflation, and trust in entitlement promises that were more fantasy than reality. Even with the pittance that social security pays to seniors, it is bankrupt and bringing the economy to its knees. It is no wonder that many in the younger generations want no part of it, and they should not be forced into a failed system.
On the other hand, holding physical gold can defend against aggressive government monetary policies that threaten to inflate away the value of your life savings. During the hyperinflation in post WWI Germany, what used to be a comfortable nest egg was suddenly the value of a postage stamp. If one held just a portion of their savings in precious metals, the crisis was greatly softened. Gold will never be worth nothing, even if the exact price fluctuates. There is a famous photograph, however, of a German woman during this time period burning piles of tightly bound banknotes to keep warm.
Imagine if the money you earned had honest, stable value, or even appreciated like an investment! No such special measures, like converting dollars to gold, would be required to ensure that your savings would sustain you in your golden years. That is the way it could be and is supposed to be. However, the government’s thirst for power will not be easily, or cheaply, quenched. Fiat currency is one tool governments have to extract wealth quietly from the working class. It is time for the people to wake up to this ruse and look to the Constitution to restore sound currency.

In just one year.
Remember the election in 2006?

Thought you might like to read the following:

A little over one year ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;

2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;

3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;

2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;

3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);

4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock
and mutua l fund losses);

5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;

6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Remember it’s Congress that makes law not the President. He has to work with
what’s handed to him.

Quote of the Day……..

‘My friends, we live in the greatest
nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we
try to change it.’ — Barack Obama

Part 2:

Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican
you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008

Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates.

It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is
screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama or
Hillary are elected, they both say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a
good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can’t wait for
it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam
somebody out of some money and they don’t even know what happened.

PART 3:

You think the war in Iraq
is costing us too much?
Read this:

Boy, am I confused. I have been hammered with the propaganda that it is the Iraq war
and the war on terror that is bankrupting us. I now find that to be RIDICULOUS.

I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many
times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the
URL’s for verification of all the following facts.

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal
aliens each year by state governments.

Verify at: http://tinyurl.com/zob77

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance
programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://www.cis..org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://www.cis..org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary
school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children
of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.

Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the
American taxpayers.

Verify at: http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that’s two and a half times that of white
non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern
Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border .

Verify at: Homeland Security Report: http://tinyurl.com/t9sht

12. The National Policy Institute, ‘estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206
and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.

Verify at: http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.

Verify at: http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm

14. ‘The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by
Illegal Immigrants In The United States.’

Verify at: http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml

The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.

Are we THAT stupid?

If this doesn’t bother you then just delete the message. If, on the other hand, it does raise the hair
on the back of your neck, I hope you forward it to every legal resident in the country including every representative in Washington, D.C. - five times a week for as long as it takes to restore some
semblance of intelligence in our policies and enforcement thereof.

Two score and eighteen years ago our leaders brought forth on this continent the greatest nation on earth, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that no other nation could equal us. Now we are engaged in a great challenge of endurance and survival, testing whether that nation, or any other nation that was so strong and so powerful can long endure. We are meet on a great battlefield, it is a new war consisting of economic, industrial and political struggles. We are losing many of these battlefields as our congress and politicians allow the out sourcing of our jobs and companies, along with the failure to remedy our broken borders. This is not why many gave their lives so that this nation may live. It is also fitting and proper that we correct this. But in a larger sense, we cannot Dedicate, we cannot Consecrate- we cannot hallow this country. The brave men and women, living and dead, who struggled here, have Consecrated it, far above our politicians to add and detract. The world has always looked to America for assurance, support, leadership and assistance which she gave unconditionally. It is for us the VOTERS rather than remain complaisant but take back the country which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us–that is to vote out every incumbent in the Senate and Congress. After all anything has to be better than what we have now. That from these new and fresh politicians we can take increased devotion to our cause for which many gave the last full measure of devotion. That we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain- that this nation under God, shall have NEW GROWTH— NEW BUSINESS–and NEW JOBS, along with ENERGY INDEPENDENCE and BORDER SECURITY—-and that Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Bill Balsamico
Casa D’ice
N. Versailles Pa. 15137

by Chuck Baldwin
August 15, 2008

Every time violence erupts somewhere in the world, our national leaders and news media make it sound like that particular outbreak is America’s greatest threat. The conflict between Russia and Georgia is no exception. Almost as soon as news of the conflict broke, the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee, John McCain, was suggesting that the United States (or the United Nations) should send troops to the scene. I guess two wars are not enough for McCain; he now wants to start a third. (And with all his talk about bombing Iran, make that four.) And talk all over Washington, D.C., was mostly about what kind of military response the United States should take.

Have people lost their minds? Or do people really believe that the United States is the world’s–or should we say the United Nations’–policeman? Apparently, that is what our national leaders from both major parties believe.

Let’s face it: most of America’s foreign policy over the last several decades has been more about fulfilling the U.N.’s global desires than protecting the people and property of the United States. And, yes, that includes America’s invasion of Iraq.

Do readers not remember that soon after launching the invasion of Iraq, President Bush appeared before the United Nations and plainly told that sinister organization that the reason he had ordered the invasion of Iraq was to “defend . . . the credibility of the United Nations”? Frankly, I did not know the United Nations had any credibility worth defending. Nevertheless, G.W. Bush was willing to sacrifice over 4,000 American lives for the express purpose of defending the U.N.’s “credibility.” Now, John McCain appears willing to send troops to Georgia.

I will not use this column to analyze the specific events leading up to Russia’s attack against Georgia, except to say that one can count on the fact that there is much more to the story than what NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN are telling us.

In addition, one of the major fallacies being perpetrated by most in Washington, D.C., is the notion that America is somehow strengthened and protected by aggressive meddling in the affairs of foreign countries. Such a philosophy was considered anathema to America’s Founding Fathers. They rightly understood that such reasoning created more problems than it solved and that it made America more vulnerable, not more secure.

Regardless of what the underlying and overriding reasons for Russia’s attack might have been, I will say here and now that the Russian-Georgian conflict is not America’s greatest threat. I will also be so bold as to say that Iran or North Korea is not America’s greatest threat, either. In fact, I will categorically state that no foreign nation (although, of all foreign nations, Red China should undoubtedly be our biggest concern–and none of our national leaders seem the least bit concerned about it) is America’s greatest threat. America’s greatest threat comes from within. And I am not alone in that opinion.

Daniel Webster warned, “There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing.”

While the national media focuses on Russia, Georgia, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Iran, our own leaders are quietly molding the clay of our own demise right here at home. Both political parties, and the standard-bearers they select, are facilitating the surrender of our national sovereignty and independence. They are working in darkness to build an international community where the laws and principles of individual nation-states (including America’s) are made subservient to the laws and principles of international entities. This is America’s greatest threat.

For example, John McCain supports the International Criminal Court. Can you believe this? Can you imagine U.S. citizens being hauled off before an international court to be tried for crimes? Imagine an international court whose rulings and opinions overrule U.S. rulings and opinions. Imagine a court setting where the constitutional protections of the Bill of Rights are null and void. Imagine a court setting where international law trumps U.S. or state laws. If that is not a surrender of U.S. sovereignty, nothing is! And John McCain is all for it.

Furthermore, both John McCain and Barack Obama support NAFTA, the WTO, GATT, and the FTAA. Both major party candidates support the NAFTA superhighway, the creation of a North American Community (which is the precursor to a North American Union), the SPP, and the United Nations.

Ladies and Gentlemen, America is on the verge of losing its independence and its national sovereignty. And both major political parties (along with a compliant national media) are equally culpable. And mark this down: when America loses its independence and national sovereignty, we also lose our freedoms and liberties. Please remember that before a Constitution and Bill of Rights could be drafted, there was first drafted a Declaration of Independence. It is the Declaration of Independence that lays the cornerstone and builds the wall of protection around the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Lose the Declaration and we lose the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

No, the greatest threat to America does not come from Russia, Iraq, Iran, or any other foreign country. America’s greatest threat comes from a complacent populace who would sit back and do nothing while our own civil magistrates surrender our nation’s sovereignty and independence to international interests.

Think about it: 232 years after Thomas Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence, and after our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to defend that document, our nation’s leaders from both major parties are in the process of ceding America back to the kind of global empire from which we fought to break free. This is America’s greatest threat!