Since the document below talks about abolishing the government, it is a terrorist and seditious document under the new NDAA law. It must be stricken from the history books and never repeated under pain of being “disappeared” by the military for indefinite detention:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to ABOLISH it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”—Declaration of Independence

Wildfeather:  Many thanks for that:

“God forbid that mere power, dependent for its exercise on Executive will (a condition destructive of political happiness), shall ever be substituted in its place. Should that unfortunately ever occur, unless it was soon corrected by the authority of the people, the objects of our Revolutionary struggle, the sacrifices of our ancestors, and the design of the Constitution will all have been in vain.”

No matter who is or becomes “the Executive”.  (And to think that an executive trained in constitional law actually signed such an allowance into law is absolutely intolerable!

ARGUMENT ON THE JURISDICTION OF THE MILITARY COMMISSION,
BY
REVERDY JOHNSON,
Counsel for Mary Surratt

June 16, 1865

Excerpt:

“If a military commission, created by the mere authority of the President, can deprive a citizen of the benefit of the guaranties secured by the 5th amendment, it can deprive him of those secured by the 6th. It may deny him the right to a “speedy and public trial,” information “of the nature and cause of the accusation,” of the right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him,” of compulsory process for his witnesses,” and of “the assistance of counsel for his defense.” That this can be done no one has as yet maintained; no opinion, however latitudinarian, of executive power, of the effect of public necessity, in war or peace to enlarge its sphere, and authorize a disregard of its limitations; no one, however convinced he may be of the policy of protecting accusing witnesses from a public examination, under the idea that their testimony can not otherwise be obtained, and that crime may consequently go unpublished, has to this time been found to go to that extent. Certainly, no writer has ever maintained such a doctrine. Argument to refute it, is unnecessary. It refutes itself. For, if sound, the 6th amendment, which our fathers thought so vital to individual liberty when assailed by governmental prosecution, is but a dead letter, totally inefficient for its purpose whenever the Government shall deem it proper to try a citizen by a military commission. Against such a doctrine the very instincts of freemen revolt. It has no foundation but in the principle of unrestrained, tyrannic power, and passive obedience. If it be well founded, then are we indeed a nation of slaves, and not of freemen. If the Executive can legally decide whether a citizen is to enjoy the guaranties of liberty afforded by the Constitution, what are we but slaves? If the President, or any of his subordinates, upon any pretence whatever, can deprive a citizen of such guaranties, liberty with us, however loved, is not enjoyed. But the Constitution is not so fatally defective. It is subject to no such reproach. In war and in peace, it is equally potential for the promotion of the general welfare, and as involved in and necessary to such welfare, for the protection of the individual citizen. Certainly, until this rebellion, this has been the proud and cherished conviction of the country. And it is to this conviction and the assurance that it could never be shaken that our past prosperity is to be referred. God forbid that mere power, dependent for its exercise on Executive will (a condition destructive of political happiness), shall ever be substituted in its place. Should that unfortunately ever occur, unless it was soon corrected by the authority of the people, the objects of our Revolutionary struggle, the sacrifices of our ancestors, and the design of the Constitution will all have been in vain.”

__________________________
Romney speaking on public detention: “ ... in this country we have a right to take those people and put them in jail.”

Who we?

___________________________
See the Movie “The Conspirator” Directed by Robert Redford about the trial of Mary Surratt.

NDAA will be ruled as a constitutionally correct law. defense of usa interests always had been a constitutional
demand.
the constitution vests in the three branches of the system of rule the responsibility in deciding what usa
interests are and when/where they are threatened.

framers of the constitution and so-called fathers of the confederation must have know what i just asserted
and that usa would forever be ruled [they hoped] by those people who own more or much more than others.
the idea is so simple that most people do not espy it. in fact, the idea was an ancient one and prevalent in all
lands and empires until just recent time and not just in usa.
===
caveat about constitution or any writ for that matter! it cannot be ever known—it can be only interpreted. in
usa the only valid interpretation of any passage in the usa constitution is that of the so-called onepercent;
includes judiciary.
it is myth that onepercent has two different or opposing agents in congress or that there are three branches
of governance. in usa YOU HAVE ONE TRUTH/THOUGHT/IDEOLOGY and not two or more. bozhidar balkas,
planet

This is scary stuff. Yet another example of the corporate state making
unconstitutional moves to protect their fat. Freedom, that we have long taken for
granted and enjoyed in America, is about to be eroded and it’s only the beginning.