West’s YES vote to the military arrest and indefinite detention of American citizens IN AMERICA is a repudiation of the protections bequeathed to us by the Framers and the Ratifiers under their construction of the constitution.
West’s rationalization for his YES vote to NDAA is typical of the excuse machine now being mobilized by the GOP in response to constituent dissatisfaction. So typical in fact, Rep. Justin Amash uses a video of Mr. West explaining NDAA to a South Florida Tea Party group as a classic example of misapprehending the bill, or worse yet, misleading the voters.
West’s YES vote to NDAA gives unprecedented power to the office of the president. How interesting that he gives such power to the very man he claims to detest so vehemently. Indeed, with his YES vote to NDAA, Mr. West voted WITH all of the people in the above quote he would like to “get the hell out of the United States of America.” That’s right. Allen West’s YES vote for NDAA was
bipartisan with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Mr. West’s YES vote to NDAA makes a potential enemy of the state of every blogger, Bircher, Liberty Activist and Tenther who comes too close to the truth or gains too much of a following.
Mr. West’s Yes vote to NDAA takes down the shield of the following constitutional
•Article I Section 9, Clause 2’s right to seek Writ of Habeas Corpus;
•The First Amendment’s right to petition the Government for a
redress of grievances;
•The Fourth Amendment’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures;
•The Fifth Amendment’s right to be free from charge for an infamous or capitol crime until presentment or
indictment by a Grand Jury;
•The Fifth Amendment’s right to be free from deprivation of life, liberty, or property,
without Due Process of law;
•The Sixth Amendment’s right in criminal prosecutions to enjoy a speedy trial
by an impartial jury in the State and District where the crime shall have been
•The Sixth Amendment’s right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;
•The Sixth Amendment’s right confront witnesses;
•The Sixth Amendment’s right to Counsel;
• The Eighth Amendment’s right to be free from excessive bail and fines, and cruel and unusual punishment;
•The Fourteenth Amendment’s right to be free from deprivation of life, liberty, or property, without Due Process of law;
Mr. West’s YES vote to NDAA is not just some minor academic argument we can all agree to disagree on and let stand. Mr. West’s YES vote to NDAA is a 1776 issue. Mr. West, with his YES vote to NDAA repudiates several of our original grievances with King George and Great Britain found in our Declaration of Independence as follows:
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments
EVERY member of Florida’s D.C. contingent in both houses of Congress voted YES to NDAA with the EXCEPTION of Bill Posey, Connie Mack and Alcee Hastings. Yes, that Alcee Hastings. Mario Diaz Balart and Bill Young did not vote. The much heralded Marco Rubio, another ‘anti Obama’ candidate from 2010 also voted YES.
Voting YES to NDAA is an unforgiveable act of treachery. None of Florida’s D.C. contingent who voted YES to NDAA deserves re-election. No matter what they do from here on out, the level of treachery exhibited by them with this single vote puts them on the wrong side of the constitution. Any individual or group who runs interference for them should seriously search their hearts for their own position on individual liberty.
Each of these Congressmen had the opportunity to make a “bold statement” for LIBERTY. They failed. Instead they turned it into their OJ Simpson moment, erasing with one act of inconceivable evil anything good they may have done before or will do again after this attack on freedom.
That even discussing the possibility of these provisions should come up in the halls of Congress is disgusting enough. For it to be passed with such bipartisan support suggests that time has expired to decide if one stands with The Constitution, Every Issue, Every Time, No Exceptions, No Excuses; or one is more interested in making friends with political insiders and supporting a party agenda.
One opposes tyranny, or one enables it. There is no middle ground and time is not an ally. Wrapping tyranny in the flag and calling it security makes it no less evil.
By: Andrew Nappi