Why REX 84?


Suppose you demonstrate against our “Government Treason” and are arrested for “disturbing the peace”, or as the police call it, when they declare: “This is an “Illegal Assembly” get lost or get arrested” What do you think would happen if you were demonstrating “Armed with Guns” in open sight? What do you think the police would do?

Yet the First Amendment guaranteed you the right, “to peacefully assemble to redress your government”?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Can our government lock us up for doing nothing? They did once before in February 1942. Executive Order 9066 to send American citizens of German, Italian, and Japanese ancestry, taken from their homes and businesses and sent to Detention Centers. Legal?


               Do we have to be armed to ensure our “right to assemble” to confront our government?

                                 It is getting so that’s the “only way” we can demonstrate, why?

                                         To let our government do what ever they want.


       In 1776 we faced the British with guns; we meant business to ensure our freedom from the British.

                     Do we have a right to face our leaders to demand restoration of our Freedom?

                                                                      or           “REX 84”

              REX 84, will explain Dentention Camps

                         On MSNBC: Canceling your right to a trial.  Writ of Habeas corpus?



I want you to remember that in February 1942 we detained American citizens of German, Italian or oriental ancestry, American citizens taken from their homes, business’s eliminated, and sent them to Detention Centers, not prisons, but with Barbed Wire and Gun towers were to protect them.


When did they build the camps to hold 120,000 citizens, and aliens, when it was only 3 months after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Hawaii?


It may be for all of us, if we dare confront our government again. “REX 84”.

On “Countdown” Keith Olbermann examined the: “Military Commission’s Act of 2006” and what it does to something called “a writ of Habeas Corpus”.


A writ of Habeas Corpus, the right to a speedy trial, with a Jury. NOW CANCELLED.


You can be held Indefinitely: without trial.


The following is a transcript of Keith Olbermann's special report on habeas corpus, as reported on Tuesday, October 10th:2007

The president has now succeeded where no one has before.  He’s managed to kill the: Writ of Habeas Corpus.  Tonight, a special investigation:

How that, in turn, kills nothing less than your Bill of Rights. Because the Mark Foley story began to break on the night of September 28, 07 exploding the following day, many people may not have noticed the bill passed by the Senate that night.


Congress passed the “Military Commissions Act of 2006”: to give Mr. Bush the power to deal effectively with America’s enemies—those who seek to harm the country.  He has been very clear on whom he thinks that is.

That act sounds so innocent, doesn’t it? You just wouldn’t think it had anything to do with you.


From Wikipedia.org: This ACT makes it possible for US citizens to be designated an “unlawful enemy combatant”, because: It could be read to include “anyone who has donated money to a charity for orphans in Afghanistan” that turns out to have some connection to the Taliban,

or” a person organizing an anti-war protest in Washington, D.C.


As such: a “writ of Habeas Corpus” may be denied to US citizens, Jennifer Van Bergen, a journalist with a law degree, responds to the comment that “Habeas Corpus” has never been afforded to foreign combatants with the suggestion that, using the current sweeping definition of war on terror and unlawful combatant, it is impossible to know where the battlefield is and who combatants are. Also, she notes that already most of the detentions are unlawful.


The Act also suggests that unlawful enemy combatant refers to ”any person” who, “Before, On, or After” the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006”, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a “Combatant Status Review Tribunal”, or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.


“Before, On, or After” sure covers a long time.


      WHY has our government come up with:

          Army Regulations 210-35, “Civilian Inmate Labor Program?” (See 1)


When an open dictatorship emerges, wholesale roundups of dissidents will occur.

U.S. Army Regulation 210-35, entitled Civilian Inmate Labor Program, already provides

Army policy and guidance for establishing civilian inmate labor programs and

civilian prison camps on Army installations.


Instructions for the Army to put civilians to work! What Civilians? Those detained by REX 84?

Those citizens detained, when we are under “Martial Law” enacted under the Executive Orders?

Halliburton confirms building Concentration Camps to hold detainees on the 17th February 2006

to the Council of Foreign Relations.


Donald Rumsfeld feels the News media is at fault for reporting on the government, and the Media must be stopped reporting.

You “MUST,” read this entire article. >> See: Halliburton


Some commentators have interpreted this to mean that if the President says you are an enemy combatant, then you “effectively are”.

Habeus corpus = the right to confront your accussor in a court of law in a trial. The right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed by the 6th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. NOW CANCELLED.


http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/  to check other bills passed by Congress


Two provisions of the “MCA 2006” have been criticized for allegedly making it harder to, prosecute and convict officers and employees of the U.S. government for misconduct in office.

(Of course, what else would you expect)