Lost among the vast array
of dangerous new legislation,
regulations and sweeping changes
which have been forced upon the American
people under the current regime, is a little known
Executive Order which was signed by Barack
Obama on December 16, 2009.
The little known order was quietly released
and posted on the White House web site the
following day, the brief Executive Order is entitled
"AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425
DESIGNATING INTERPOL AS A PUBLIC
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION ENTITLED
TO ENJOY CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, EXEMPTIONS,
AND IMMUNITIES."
The Washington Examiner said
that Obama's directive could possibly
be "the most destructive blow ever struck
against American constitutional civil liberties."
With the stroke of a pen Mr. Obama handed
sweeping police powers within American territory
to an international organization which will be free
to conduct police operations without domestic
oversight or accountability.
In the succeeding months Obama's White House
has not seen fit to offer up an explanation for this
freedom killing directive.
Nonetheless we can be fairly certain
that the Obama regime and Interpol have begun
to quietly implement this poisonous order just
waiting for the day when it can be unleashed
upon an unsuspecting population
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/07/a_prelude_to_global_governance.html
For a national government to refuse
to exercise an authority -- in this case,
enforcing the borders -- amounts
to abandonment.
Nature abhors such a vacuum,
so the United States' abdication
of naturalization enforcement must be filled.
Enter Arizona's immigration enforcement law.
In fact, Arizona's action is in keeping
with our nation's founding principles.
Thomas Jefferson wrote
in the Declaration of Independence
that when a government no longer meets the
needs of the governed, it is open to alteration.
Arizona's reaction is therefore mild.
Instead of abolishing federal authority,
or supplanting federal statutes, the state has
upheld both in enforcing the existing national law.
States aren't obligated to tie their hands or turn their
heads when Washington ignores its assignments.
If that were the case, what would happen
if Washington ignored its duties in other areas?
Reconsider Article I, Section 8,
which not only establishes the federal
government's naturalization powers, but
also compels Congress to "provide for
the common defense ... of the United States."
If a foreign power were to invade
one of the several states, the national
government would be constitutionally
responsible for repelling the invaders.
Suppose Washington simply refused to
deploy the armed forces to the besieged state?
Would that state be constitutionally bound
to accept the occupying force, since its defense
is an established federal duty?
Only the most naïve pacifist
would accept such a proposition.
A state so occupied would be
well within its right, and obligated
to its citizens, to act against the occupiers.
The same holds true
when the invading force
comprises not military personal, but illegal aliens
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/federal_failure_and_arizona.html
Exposing
The Enemies
Of Free Enterprise
http://thefreeenterpriser.blogspot.com/
