Obama's 'Civilian National Security Force'

[vector7]

TREASON Obamas Private Army

[Ryan Ruck]

YouTube: Children Taught To Chant "I am an Obama Scholar"

[vector7]

Is Attorney General Backing the Black Panthers?

by SodaHead Politics Posted 29 minutes ago



According to a recent Fox News report, a former Justice Department attorney who quit his job in protest over the Obama Administration’s handling of a New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case is accusing Attorney General Eric Holder of dropping the charges for racially motivated reasons while painting the administration as a hotbed of reverse racism.

Conservative blogger J. Christian Adams, now an attorney in Virginia, claims he and other unnamed Justice Department lawyers working on the case were ordered to dismiss it, alleging that there is a “pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases.”

In the waning days of the Bush administration, three Black Panthers – Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson – were charged with violating the Voter Rights Act in November 2008 by using coercion, threats and intimidation at a polling station.

The Justice Department defended the dropping of the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations and dropped charges against the others after a “careful assessment of the facts and the law.”

The Obama Administration won a default judgment in the civil case against the three in April 2009 when they didn’t appear in court, but then dismissed the charges in May 2009, while a criminal complaint, which resulted in the injunction, proceeded successfully.

Adams claims that after the dismissal, Justice Department attorneys were instructed not to bring any more cases against racial minorities under the Voting Section, saying that the New Black Panther case was the “easiest” one he ever had while at Justice.”

Do you believe that the Attorney General purposely tossed the New Black Panther case on racial grounds alone?

[vector7]

Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case for Racial Reasons

Published June 30, 2010 | FOXNews.com

• Comments (473)

Attorney General Eric Holder speaks, Friday, June 11, 2010, at the Richard B. Russell Federal Courthouse in Atlanta. (AP)

A former Justice Department attorney who quit his job to protest the Obama administration's handling of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case is accusing Attorney General Eric Holder of dropping the charges for racially motivated reasons.

J. Christian Adams, now an attorney in Virginia and a conservative blogger for Pajamas Media, says he and the other Justice Department lawyers working on the case were ordered to dismiss it.

"I mean we were told, 'Drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party,'" Adams told Fox News, adding that political appointees Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division since 2003, ordered the dismissal.

Asked about the Justice Department's claim that they are career attorneys, not political appointees, Adams said "obviously, that's false."

"Under the vacancy reform act, they were serving in a political capacity," he said. "This is one of the examples of Congress not being told the truth, the American people not being told the truth about this case. It's one of the other examples in this case where the truth simply is becoming another victim of the process."

Adams claimed an unnamed political appointee said if somebody wants to bring these kinds of cases, "that' not going to de done out of the civil rights division."

Adams also accused Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez of lying under oath to Congress about the circumstances surrounding the decision to drop the probe.

The Justice Department has defended its move to drop the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations while dismissing charges against the others "based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law."

But Adams told Fox News that politics and race was at play in the dismissal.

"There is a pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases," Adams told Fox News' Megyn Kelly.

Adams says the dismissal is a symptom of the Obama administration's reverse racism and that the Justice Department will not pursue voting rights cases against white victims.

"In voting, that will be the case over the next few years, there's no doubt about it," he said.

In an opinion article published in the Washington Times last week, Adams said the dismissal "raises serious questions about the department's enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election."

Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler dismissed Adams' accusations as a "good faith disagreement" with ulterior motives.

"It is not uncommon for attorneys within the department to have good faith disagreements about the appropriate course of action in a particular case, although it is regrettable when a former department attorney distorts the facts and makes baseless allegations to promote his or her agenda," she said in a written statement.

In the final days of the Bush administration, three Black Panthers -- Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson -- were charged in a civil complaint with violating the Voter Rights Act in November 2008 by using coercion, threats and intimidation at a Philadelphia polling station -- with Shabazz brandishing what prosecutors called a deadly weapon.

The Obama administration won a default judgment in federal court in April 2009 when the Black Panthers didn't appear in court to fight the charges. But the administration moved to dismiss the charges in May 2009. Justice attorneys said a criminal complaint, which resulted in the injunction, proceeded successfully.

The department "is committed to comprehensive and vigorous enforcement of both the civil and criminal provisions of federal law that prohibit voter intimidation. We continue to work with voters, communities, and local law enforcement to ensure that every American can vote free from intimidation, coercion or threats," Schmaler said Wednesday.

But the Justice Department's explanation has failed to appease the United States Commission on Civil Rights, which is probing the department's decision, or Republican lawmakers who say the dismissal could lead to an escalation of voter intimidation.

The commission held a hearing in April in which Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., who has led the charge for answers from the Justice Department, was among those testifying. The Justice Department did not provide witnesses at that hearing. Instead, Perez testified before the commission in May.

"At a minimum, without sufficient proof that New Black Panther Party or Malik Zulu Shabazz directed or controlled unlawful activities at the polls, or made speeches directed to immediately inciting or producing lawless action on Election Day, any attempt to bring suit against those parties based merely upon their alleged 'approval' or 'endorsement' of Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jackson’s activities would have likely failed," he told the commission.

The commission has repeatedly sought information from the Justice Department, going as far as filing subpoenas. Schmaler said the department has provided 2,000 pages of information in response.
But Adams said in the Times article that the department ordered the attorneys "to ignore the subpoena, lawlessly placing us in an unacceptably legal limbo."

Adams also says that after the dismissal, Justice Department attorneys were instructed not to bring any more cases against racial minorities under the Voting Section.

Adams told Fox News that the New Black Panther case was the "easiest I ever had at the Justice Department.

"It doesn't get any easier than this," he said. "If this doesn't constitute voter intimidation, nothing will."

[vector7]

The Civilian Expeditionary Force: Obama Says 'Burden' Can’t be All on the Military

From Sunlen Miller
June 30, 2010 4:49 PM



During his town hall in Racine, Wisconsin today President Obama spoke about the civilian expeditionary force within his National Security Strategy.

“We just got to be smart about using all the elements of American power, not just one element of American power,” he said.

The president pointed to Iraq and Afghanistan where military personnel are having to engage in work that he said really should be civilian work– like building schools and bridges -- because of under-resourcing on the civilian side

“The problem is -- is that we don't have a civilian effort that has always matched up to the military effort. So the military goes in there, they clear out everything, they're -- they're making everything secure, and now the question is, all right, can we get the civilians to come in to work with the local governments to improve the situation? And a lot of times that civilian side of it has been under-resourced.”

Mr. Obama said the burden should not be all on the military.

“Make sure that we've got a civilian expeditionary force that, when we go out into some village somewhere and the military makes it secure, let's have that agricultural specialist right there, let’s have that person who knows how to train a police force right there, let's -- let's have all those personnel and let's make sure that we are giving them the support that they need in order for us to be successful on our mission.”

The president warned that if the civilian side is shortchanged it could lead to another “very dangerous situation” if the diplomatic work is not done and “the only solution is a military solution that might cost us five times as much.”

Within the administration’s National Security Strategy – released at the end of May – one of the components is a civilian expeditionary force which the White House says is “fundamental” to national security.

“Our diplomatic personnel and missions must be expanded at home and abroad to support the increasingly transnational nature of 21st century security challenges,” the NSS writes, “And we must provide the appropriate authorities and mechanisms to implement and coordinate assistance programs and grow the civilian expeditionary capacity required to assist governments on a diverse array of issues.”

[American Patriot]

Mr. Obama is putting down the military, yet again.

A civilian force? Sure.

Right.

[vector7]

The Obama Administration Protected Black Panther Who Advocates Killing White Babies

leave a comment »
This is the same man who the Eric Holder-led Department of Justice refused to prosecute for voter intimidation.



Why would Obama protect a racists? Probably the same reason he sat in a racist church led by a racist pastor for over 20 years. Obama said he wanted to be judged by those he surrounds himself with. Judge his inaction on this event as well.

[vector7]

Video: The nice young man Eric Holder let off the hook

Share1038
posted at 10:00 pm on July 6, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

When Attorney General Eric Holder suddenly reversed course and had the DoJ dismiss the voter-intimidation case against two New Black Panther Party activists stemming from an incident in 2008 in Philadelphia, many questioned why the DoJ would quit a case it had already won.

Attorneys within the DoJ wondered why the federal government had suddenly become disinterested in voter intimidation. Some, like Christian Adams, Asheesh Agarwal, and Mark Corallo have gone public with their outrage, and also wonder where the hell Congress has gone in its duty to oversee the executive branch and its enforcement of laws Congress passed.

Well, look, maybe this was just a bad day for the defendants.

Maybe they were just nice young men who took civic engagement to a momentary extreme of enthusiasm. They’re probably just nice guys caught in a single instance of bad judgment … right? Er, not exactly, as Naked Emperor News and Breitbart’s B-Cast discovers after watching National Geographic:



Lovely. Someone’s crackers, and I’d say it’s the people who decided to drop the case against this lunatic.

[vector7]

Was listening to Savage yesterday on the way home about this subject; he has a way of putting it all together.


Here's the broadcast.

[vector7]

Russia Defends the Black Panthers and goes after FNC

I guess we shouldn't be to hard on Russian TV, for supporting The racist hate group out loud, as the state run medias here in America haven't even reported on this at all

[vector7]

New Black Panther President Praises Bin Laden



Malik Zulu Shabazz speaking to a group of Black Panthers about Osama Bin Laden: "Give him a hand.. he's bringing reform to the world"

[vector7]

We Will Not Be Silenced, Falsified delegate counts, Falsified documents, and other violations

How Obama Used an Army of Thugs to Steal the 2008 Democratic Party Nomination

By Fred Dardick Thursday, July 8, 2010

Think those billy club armed New Black Panther thugs in Philadelphia were the first time Obama used Stalinist tactics to intimidate voters and disenfranchise the American people?

Think again.
In testimony this week before Congress, former Justice Department Official J. Christian Adams revealed that not only were similar claims “pervasive”, but Obama activists committed the “same” crimes during the 2008 Democratic primary to help then Sen. Obama defeat Democratic heir apparent Hillary Clinton.

Obama gamed the system in 2008 by not only allowing an army of young men station themselves outside polling locations in African American communities to prevent elderly women and others from voting for their chosen candidate, Hillary Clinton, but he also trained thousands of willing accomplices—while I do not have confirmation, I do sense the presence of ACORN here—spread throughout the Democratic caucuses to commit voter fraud on a massive scale.

The movie “We Will Not Be Silenced”, made by Democratic Party activist Gigi Gaston, produced by Bettina Sofia Viviano, and executive produced by former Clinton Campaign Regional Director John Siegel, documents how the unknown Senator from Illinois used “falsified delegate counts, falsified documents, and other violations” to beat the seemingly unbeatable Clinton machine and claim the Democratic nomination.

The documentary describes “the disenfranchising of American citizens by the Democratic Party and the Obama Campaign… ‘Change’ from Chicago encouraged and created an army to steal caucus packets, falsify documents, change results, allow unregistered people to vote, scare and intimidate Hillary supporters, stalk them, threaten them, lock them out of their polling places, silence their voices and stop their right to vote.”

“Teachers, professors, civil rights activists, lawyers, janitors, physicists, ophthalmologists, accountants, mathematicians, retirees… discuss how their party has disenfranchised them, and how, when they saw and reported multiple instances of fraud, everyone turned a blind eye. Rather than support and protect the voices and votes of its loyal members, the DNC chose to sweep this under the rug by looking the other way.”

During the election the Hillary campaign issued multiple press releases in an attempt to publicize these events and bring them to the voter’s attention, but to no avail. The main stream media, like the Democrat Party leadership, had already chosen their candidate.

They willfully ignored the worst election abuses in a generation and allowed an immoral and unworthy man take control of this great nation.
I highly recommend you watch the entire video; it will only take about 35 minutes and is well worth the time. Be sure to forward it on to others, because everyone should know the true story about how Obama became President.

A link to the We Will Not Be Silenced website.

The documentary is available in four parts on YouTube here. ()

We Will Not Be Silenced Highlights
Part 1, 3:35, “Obama supporters were going back through the crowd, telling the people that were on the other side of the table and people outside (Hillary supporters), that they could go home, that they had been counted. I turned and said ‘Don’t they need to sign a sheet first?’ And of course, that is how they are counted. A lot of those people who went home (without signing), English was not their first language.”

Part 1, 4:45, “I was listening to a conversation… The people were talking about how they were going to be collecting names for the following day, asking people if they were coming back to caucus… They were talking about how they were going to be taking those names and they wouldn’t have to be physically there, but their votes would be counted.”

Part 2, 0:25, Dr. Linda Hayes: “We investigated fraud at the precinct level in conventions all over south Houston… Hillary attained 51% of the votes in Texas and by popular vote Obama only attained 47.4%. As a scientist and mathematician I was curious as the results came in from the precincts and that the precinct caucuses did not reflect those numbers, so I could see something was wrong… We laboriously went through each of the (caucus) sign in sheets to see if they were properly filled out… and many, many, many Obama people either came to the wrong precinct, they did not sign in properly, they did not show ID, or they had not voted that day… How they determine the delegates is on these sign in sheets. So when so many people were registered illegally for Obama, they attained the lion’s portion of the delegates.”

Part 2, 5:35, John Siegel: “Hillary won the popular vote by about 4%, but ended up losing the caucuses by 10%. So there is this huge 14 point swing between what Hillary should have won in a normal state and what she got at the end of the caucuses in Texas.”

Part 2, 6:20, “The worst thing that we saw in Indiana, was parents coming into the office saying that the Gary Indiana Public School System had bussed their children to Crown Point Indiana to vote in the election. That was a great civics lesson, but if children were being told to go to the polls and vote for Obama, which they were, parents were livid. They were outraged and they wanted to know what could be done about this… It was atrocious, because what lesson in civics were kids learning that day? Win by any means necessary? The right to vote is a sacred right in America, and we take school children and bus them on a school day, tell them who to vote for, then pay them for their lunch, and then dismiss them from school early on taxpayer money?”

Part 3, 0:00, “By about twelve o’clock, one o’clock on election day, all hell broke loose. We started getting phone calls from people at various precincts where there were Obama supporters getting sign-ins before the polls had even closed. We had people who were being shouted down and intimidated when they were for Hillary Clinton.”

Part 3, 3:54, Civil Rights Activist who had marched with Martin Luther King: “I had come to Indiana in the early afternoon about one o’clock. I was just sort of riding through the communities to get a feel for what was going on… There were some guys who had put up lawn chairs in front of the door going into the community center, so I stopped and parked my car. I got out of my car and there was this lady, probably about 80 years old, who was slowly walking up the street. As she was approaching the entranceway to go into the building, one of the young men called to her ‘If you’re not voting for Obama, go home, because you’re not voting here today.’ She turned and walked away. The pain that I felt, because of the people who have fought for African Americans to have the right to vote, this fight that has gone on for many, many, many years and to see two African American young men deny the right, under the veiled threat of violence, to a woman who looked to be around 80 years old, and not allow her an opportunity to vote. I felt appalled. While I was standing there, there were other people approaching, maybe four or five, and when they heard that they all turned and walked away.”

Part 3, 7:20, Kevin Dujan, Iowa: “There were these two women sitting at the table checking in people, looking over names. I went standing behind the two elderly women that we had brought to the caucus location and they mysteriously could not find their names in the book. The two women saw that these women had Hillary stickers on them… so they weren’t going to let them caucus. They said ‘Oh, you must be in some other caucus.’ I said ‘Look lady, I’m from Chicago and I know tricks like this. Let me see that book or we’re going to get the precinct captain over here and we’re going to look and find the names together. I guarantee this woman’s in here, because she’s not a liar. She’s ninety years old and has been looking forward to this. Don’t tell me she’s not in the book.’ Well then, wouldn’t you know it, miraculously and mysteriously, once I made that big of a push, she magically found her name in the book and let her go be a part of the caucus… I noticed that that was not happening for any of the Obama people, they were just getting waved right through.”

Part 4, 5:45, “I thought it was an isolated incident, just in my precinct. It’s not, and that what bothers me. How can we not look at the system? If it happens in every precinct and every one of us has a very similar story, I can not believe that we don’t see it as manipulating a situation. People told me, Obama supporters who went to the training, that they have been trained to be aggressive.”

Part 4, 6:20, “They knew from the beginning all the problems with all the security holes in the caucus. They knew they filtered out people. They knew the low turn out rates. They must have known from other elections how many votes from caucus states are not exact votes, but just an estimate projected from news organizations.”

[vector7]

Great Merciful Zeus: Gigi Gaston on FOX challenges DNC to answer for the voter fraud it allowed in 2008

YOUTUBE....Evidence - Obama Stole Election Against Hillary Voter Intimidation And Fraud

Evidence - Obama Stole Election Against Hillary Voter Intimidation And Fraud

Here’s filmmaker Gigi Gaston on Fox & Friends this morning, calling for an investigation into the fraud and voter intimidation Obama and his campaign engaged in back in 2008.

This is how Obama took the nomination from Hillary Clinton, and he used these same thug tactics in the general election to intimidate voters. He will be using the same playbook in 2012 as well, unless he and the DNC are stopped.

In this FOX clip, it’s noted that Gaston is the granddaughter of a former Democrat governor…and she’s now dedicated her life to exposing the DNC for the cesspool of corruption, fraud, and illegal activity that it is. That is the same boat all of us here are in as well: until 2008, we were all lifelong, unquestioning, party loyal Democrats who never in our lives dreamed our party would be responsible for thuggery like this.

The best way we can describe the feeling we have when we think about the DNC is to remember what the human characters on the TV show “V” felt like when they saw the masks ripped off the “Visitors”, revealing them to be lizard people underneath. Even people who had been helping the Visitors, and trying to convince others that they were really here to “serve the human race” in the non-cook book sense were instantly transformed into Resistance fighters when they saw what really lurked behind those masks.

So it is for many lifelong Democrats out there, including such prominent names as Lynn Forester de Rothschild as well, who will never look at the DNC the same way again…not after its mask has been ripped off so spectacularly.

We need to find as many creative and engaging ways as possible to get conservatives and independents out there, who did not pay attention to the Democrat primaries in 2008, to know the story Gigi Gaston has told so well in We Will Not Be Silenced 2008.

It’s the only way to stop the lizards at the DNC from doing all of this again in 2012.

Every day counts, because when the next presidential election rolls around, time will be precious and we refuse to be in a position where we’re wishing we had these two years to get back.

----------------------------------------------


A link to the We Will Not Be Silenced website.

The documentary is available in four parts on YouTube here.


1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGZFg...eature=related

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXNqF...eature=related

3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4XFv...eature=related

4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnclK...eature=related

[American Patriot]

The best way we can describe the feeling we have when we think about the DNC is to remember what the human characters on the TV show “V” felt like when they saw the masks ripped off the “Visitors”, revealing them to be lizard people underneath. Even people who had been helping the Visitors, and trying to convince others that they were really here to “serve the human race” in the non-cook book sense were instantly transformed into Resistance fighters when they saw what really lurked behind those masks.

This, I am afraid is the same bullshit that the Leftists were pulling on Bush (Sorry, not the voter fraud, but "lizard" BS) on Anomalies. Go read some of the older posts there and the threats even *I* got.

[vector7]

Obama's Army now has foundation in House

Charlie Rangel introduces Act to require ALL persons of combat age to PERFORM "national Service".


H. R. 5741

To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 15, 2010

Mr. RANGEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A BILL

To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the ‘Universal National Service Act’.

(b) Table of Contents- The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--NATIONAL SERVICE

Sec. 101. Definitions.

Sec. 102. National service obligation.

Sec. 103. Induction to perform national service.

Sec. 104. Two-year period of national service.

Sec. 105. Implementation by the President.

Sec. 106. Examination and classification of persons.

Sec. 107. Deferments and postponements.

Sec. 108. Induction exemptions.

Sec. 109. Conscientious objection.

Sec. 110. Discharge following national service.

TITLE II--AMENDMENTS TO MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT

Sec. 201. Registration of females.

Sec. 202. Registration and induction authority.

TITLE I--NATIONAL SERVICE

SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:

(1) The term ‘contingency operation’ has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)(13) of title 10, United States Code.

(2) The term ‘military service’ means service performed as a member of an active or reserve component of the uniformed services.

(3) The term ‘national service’ means military service or service in a civilian capacity that, as determined by the President, promotes the national defense, including national or community service and service related to homeland security.

(4) The term ‘Secretary concerned’ means the Secretary of Defense with respect to the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard, the Secretary of Commerce, with respect to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, with respect to the Public Health Service.

(5) The term ‘United States’, when used in a geographical sense, means the several States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam.

(6) The term ‘uniformed services’ means the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and commissioned corps of the Public Health Service.

SEC. 102. NATIONAL SERVICE OBLIGATION.

(a) Obligation for Service- It is the obligation of every citizen of the United States, and every other person residing in the United States, who is between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of national service as prescribed in this title unless exempted under the provisions of this title.

(b) Forms of National Service- The national service obligation under this title shall be performed either--

(1) as a member of an active or reserve component of the uniformed services; or

(2) in a civilian capacity that, as determined by the President, promotes the national defense, including national or community service and service related to homeland security.

(c) Age Limits- A person may be inducted under this title only if the person has attained the age of 18 and has not attained the age of 42.

SEC. 103. INDUCTION TO PERFORM NATIONAL SERVICE.

(a) Induction Requirements- The President shall provide for the induction of persons described in section 102(a) to perform their national service obligation.

(b) Limitation on Induction for Military Service- Persons described in section 102(a) may be inducted to perform military service only if--

(1) a declaration of war is in effect;

(2) the President declares a national emergency, which the President determines necessitates the induction of persons to perform military service, and immediately informs Congress of the reasons for the declaration and the need to induct persons for military service; or

(3) members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps are engaged in a contingency operation pursuant to a congressional authorization for the use of military force.

(c) Limitation on Number of Persons Inducted for Military Service- When the induction of persons for military service is authorized by subsection

(b), the President shall determine the number of persons described in section 102(a) whose national service obligation is to be satisfied through military service based on--

(1) the authorized end strengths of the uniformed services;

(2) the feasibility of the uniformed services to recruit sufficient volunteers to achieve such end-strength levels; and

(3) provide a mechanism for the random selection of persons to be inducted to perform military service.

(d) Selection for Induction-

(1) RANDOM SELECTION FOR MILITARY SERVICE- When the induction of persons for military service is authorized by subsection (b), the President shall utilize a mechanism for the random selection of persons to be inducted to perform military service.

(2) CIVILIAN SERVICE- Persons described in section 102(a) who do not volunteer to perform military service or are not inducted for military service shall perform their national service obligation in a civilian capacity pursuant to section 102(b)(2).

(e) Voluntary Service- A person subject to induction under this title may--

(1) volunteer to perform national service in lieu of being inducted; or

(2) request permission to be inducted at a time other than the time at which the person is otherwise called for induction.

SEC. 104. TWO-YEAR PERIOD OF NATIONAL SERVICE.

(a) General Rule- Except as otherwise provided in this section, the period of national service performed by a person under this title shall be two years.

(b) Grounds for Extension- At the discretion of the President, the period of military service for a member of the uniformed services under this title may be extended--

(1) with the consent of the member, for the purpose of furnishing hospitalization, medical, or surgical care for injury or illness incurred in line of duty; or

(2) for the purpose of requiring the member to compensate for any time lost to training for any cause.

(c) Early Termination- The period of national service for a person under this title shall be terminated before the end of such period under the following circumstances:

(1) The voluntary enlistment and active service of the person in an active or reserve component of the uniformed services for a period of at least two years, in which case the period of basic military training and education actually served by the person shall be counted toward the term of enlistment.

(2) The admission and service of the person as a cadet or midshipman at the United States Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, the United States Air Force Academy, the Coast Guard Academy, or the United States Merchant Marine Academy.

(3) The enrollment and service of the person in an officer candidate program, if the person has signed an agreement to accept a Reserve commission in the appropriate service with an obligation to serve on active duty if such a commission is offered upon completion of the program.

(4) Such other grounds as the President may establish.

SEC. 105. IMPLEMENTATION BY THE PRESIDENT.

(a) In General- The President shall prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out this title.

(b) Matter To Be Covered by Regulations- Such regulations shall include specification of the following:

(1) The types of civilian service that may be performed in order for a person to satisfy the person’s national service obligation under this title.

(2) Standards for satisfactory performance of civilian service and of penalties for failure to perform civilian service satisfactorily.

(3) The manner in which persons shall be selected for induction under this title, including the manner in which those selected will be notified of such selection.

(4) All other administrative matters in connection with the induction of persons under this title and the registration, examination, and classification of such persons.

(5) A means to determine questions or claims with respect to inclusion for, or exemption or deferment from induction under this title, including questions of conscientious objection.

(6) Standards for compensation and benefits for persons performing their national service obligation under this title through civilian service.

(7) Such other matters as the President determines necessary to carry out this title.

(c) Use of Prior Act- To the extent determined appropriate by the President, the President may use for purposes of this title the procedures provided in the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.), including procedures for registration, selection, and induction.

SEC. 106. EXAMINATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF PERSONS.

(a) Examination- Every person subject to induction under this title shall, before induction, be physically and mentally examined and shall be classified as to fitness to perform national service.

(b) Different Classification Standards- The President may apply different classification standards for fitness for military service and fitness for civilian service.

SEC. 107. DEFERMENTS AND POSTPONEMENTS.

(a) High School Students- A person who is pursuing a standard course of study, on a full-time basis, in a secondary school or similar institution of learning shall be entitled to have induction under this title postponed until the person--

(1) obtains a high school diploma;

(2) ceases to pursue satisfactorily such course of study; or

(3) attains the age of 20.

(b) Hardship and Disability- Deferments from national service under this title may be made for--

(1) extreme hardship; or

(2) physical or mental disability.

(c) Training Capacity- The President may postpone or suspend the induction of persons for military service under this title as necessary to limit the number of persons receiving basic military training and education to the maximum number that can be adequately trained.

(d) Termination- No deferment or postponement of induction under this title shall continue after the cause of such deferment or postponement ceases.

SEC. 108. INDUCTION EXEMPTIONS.

(a) Qualifications- No person may be inducted for military service under this title unless the person is acceptable to the Secretary concerned for training and meets the same health and physical qualifications applicable under section 505 of title 10, United States Code, to persons seeking original enlistment in a regular component of the Armed Forces.

(b) Other Military Service- No person shall be liable for induction under this title who--

(1) is serving, or has served honorably for at least six months, in any component of the uniformed services on active duty; or

(2) is or becomes a cadet or midshipman at the United States Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, the United States Air Force Academy, the Coast Guard Academy, the United States Merchant Marine Academy, a midshipman of a Navy accredited State maritime academy, a member of the Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, or the naval aviation college program, so long as that person satisfactorily continues in and completes at least two years training therein.

SEC. 109. CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION.

(a) Claims as Conscientious Objector- Nothing in this title shall be construed to require a person to be subject to combatant training and service in the uniformed services, if that person, by reason of sincerely held moral, ethical, or religious beliefs, is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form.

(b) Alternative Noncombatant or Civilian Service- A person who claims exemption from combatant training and service under subsection (a) and whose claim is sustained by the local board shall--

(1) be assigned to noncombatant service (as defined by the President), if the person is inducted into the uniformed services; or

(2) be ordered by the local board, if found to be conscientiously opposed to participation in such noncombatant service, to perform national civilian service for the period specified in section 104(a) and subject to such regulations as the President may prescribe.

SEC. 110. DISCHARGE FOLLOWING NATIONAL SERVICE.

(a) Discharge- Upon completion or termination of the obligation to perform national service under this title, a person shall be discharged from the uniformed services or from civilian service, as the case may be, and shall not be subject to any further service under this title.

(b) Coordination With Other Authorities- Nothing in this section shall limit or prohibit the call to active service in the uniformed services of any person who is a member of a regular or reserve component of the uniformed services.

TITLE II--AMENDMENTS TO MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT

SEC. 201. REGISTRATION OF FEMALES.

(a) Registration Required- Section 3(a) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. 453(a)) is amended--

(1) by striking ‘male’ both places it appears;

(2) by inserting ‘or herself’ after ‘himself’; and

(3) by striking ‘he’ and inserting ‘the person’.

(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 16(a) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 466(a)) is amended by striking ‘men’ and inserting ‘persons’.

SEC. 202. REGISTRATION AND INDUCTION AUTHORITY.

(a) Registration- Section 4 of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 454) is amended by inserting after subsection (g) the following new subsection:

‘(h) This section does not apply with respect to the induction of persons into the Armed Forces pursuant to the Universal National Service Act.’.

(b) Induction- Section 17(c) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 467(c)) is amended by striking ‘now or hereafter’ and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting ‘inducted pursuant to the Universal National Service Act.’.

This bill is very large, and loading it may cause your web browser to perform sluggishly, or even freeze. This is especially true for old and/or bad browsers. As an alternative you can download the PDF of the bill or read the text on THOMAS. Continue on to the bill...http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h111-5741

[vector7]

HR5741: Slavery has come back to the US

July 26, 9:23 PMSan Jose Libertarian ExaminerFrazier McGinn

[IMG]http://static.********.com/2010/07/i/article-images/rangel3.jpg[/IMG]
Rep. Charles B. Rangel, D-NY, is a proponent of slavery, so long as he's not the slave.

America- The bill HR5741 is government sanctioned slavery. Read it and weep.

According to opencongress.org, It was introduced on July 15th by Charles Rangel D-NY. You know what to do.

The defining paragraph reads,

'To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.'

It does exactly that, and then goes on to state that,
'It is the obligation of every citizen of the United States, and every other person residing in the United States, who is between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of national service as prescribed in this title unless exempted under the provisions of this title.'

The exceptions include things like,

'(1) extreme hardship' under the deferments section; and
'(4) Such other grounds as the President may establish.' under the Early Termination section.

The bill gets eve more interesting for conscientious objectors.

'(b) Alternative Noncombatant or Civilian Service- A person who claims exemption from combatant training and service under subsection (a) and whose claim is sustained by the local board shall--

(1) be assigned to noncombatant service (as defined by the President), if the person is inducted into the uniformed services; or

(2) be ordered by the local board, if found to be conscientiously opposed to participation in such noncombatant service, to perform national civilian service for the period specified in section 104
(a) and subject to such regulations as the President may prescribe.'

Section 201 allows the drafting and induction of females as well. Women are now fully included in not only war, but any non-combat or civilian role that the president deems necessary. Morale, for example. The powers granted by this bill are vague enough that anything goes.

Typical of a politician like Rangel.

You can shed a tear for liberty later.

Slavery bill H.R. 5741 is now in debate

July 26, 9:31 PMLong Beach City Buzz ExaminerDanita Craft


H.R. 5741 is now being debated - 2 years of forced labor from everyone between 18 and 42

H.R. 5741 is currently being argued in the house of representatives. If passed, H.R. 5741 will give the president the power to require 2 years of compulsory service from every US resident between ages 18 and 42.

That's not a misprint: everyone between ages eighteen and forty-two will be required to serve in any capacity at the president's whim.

This bill will destroy US commerce as citizens are reassigned to service.

The bill's sponsor is Charles Rangel, a democrat from New York. The bill does not yet have a co-sponsor. It was introduced on July 15th and is now before the armed services committee.

Prison Planet reports, "Under this new legislation nearly all, able bodied Americans will be sentenced to two years of forced labor. The infrastructure is already in place for those unwilling to participate in mandatory service and now the army is looking to fill it’s ranks with Interment/Resettlement Specialists."

"The slavery bill is currently in debate in the House Committee on Armed Services chaired by Rep Ike Skelton a democrat from Missouri. Those who oppose mandatory slavery should contact Rep. Skelton. Many bills die in committee and this bill should meet the same fate."

The slavery bill H.R. 5741 is now being debated. It will allow the president to require 2 years of service between every US resident between 18 and 42. The Libertarian Examiner says. "The bill HR5741 is government sanctioned slavery. Read it and weep."

[American Patriot]

The bill's sponsor is Charles Rangel, a democrat from New York. The bill does not yet have a co-sponsor. It was introduced on July 15th and is now before the armed services committee.

AH, Reparations by any other name would smell as sweet....

[vector7]

Obama's Civilian Army: The New Black Panther Party Threatens "To Deal With All These Right-Wingers"

Malik Zulu Shabazz, chairman of the New Black Panther Party, is leading the fight for Barack Obama against the Tea Party. In an July 8th interview on Russian English-language news channel RT, Shabazz comes out after Fox News, Glenn Beck and Tea Partiers.

[vector7]

Obama hid 2 Armies in the law

President Obama made a speech during the campaign about needing a "civilian security force that was just as well trained and well-funded. Who would have thought he was proposing to pay for it by making part of a HEALTHCARE BILL? This administration is hijacking Liberty and the Constitution with the laws they are jamming down our throats, so check out www.theplainfacts.com to see the details.

[Ryan Ruck]

Eric Holder: Black Panther Case Focus Demeans 'My People'

March 1, 2011

Attorney General Eric Holder finally got fed up Tuesday with claims that the Justice Department went easy in a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party because they are African American.

Holder's frustration over the criticism became evident during a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing as Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) accused the Justice Department of failing to cooperate with a Civil Rights Commission investigation into the handling of the 2008 incident in which Black Panthers in intimidating outfits and wielding a club stood outside a polling place in Philadelphia.

The Attorney General seemed to take personal offense at a comment Culberson read in which former Democratic activist Bartle Bull called the incident the most serious act of voter intimidation he had witnessed in his career.

"Think about that," Holder said. "When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, and to compare what people were subjected to there to what happened in Philadelphia—which was inappropriate, certainly that…to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line, who risked all, for my people," said Holder, who is black.

Holder noted that his late sister-in-law, Vivian Malone Jones, helped integrate the University of Alabama.

"To compare that kind of courage, that kind of action, and to say that the Black Panther incident wrong thought it might be somehow is greater in magnitude or is of greater concern to us, historically, I think just flies in the face of history and the facts.," Holder said with evident exasperation.

In a series of questions and comments earlier in the hearing, Culberson insisted that race had infected the decision-making process. "There’s clearly evidence, overwhelming evidence, that your Department of Justice refuses to protect the rights of anybody other than African Americans to vote," the Texas Republican said. "There's a pattern of a double standard here."

“I would disagree very vehemently with the notion that there’s overwhelming evidence that that is in fact true,” Holder replied. “This Department of Justice does not enforce the law in a race-conscious way.”

Rep. Chaka Fattah, a Democrat from Philadelphia, said the Black Panthers "should not have been there." But he said the GOP was making too much out of a fleeting incident involving a couple of people.

"The most unethical thing a person can do is make allegations based on absolutely nothing," Fattah said. "The only issue of race is singling out this particular decision...That this rises to national significance is bogus on its face."