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?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/27/us/27detain.html?_r=1&hp
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/109/house/2/votes/508/
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)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006#Alleged_unconstitutionality