ACTION ALERT: Texas Anti-NDAA Bill Heads to House Floor
P.A.N.D.A. People Against The NDAA
March 26, 2013

You don’t mess with Texas. At least, that’s precisely what State Rep. Lyle Larson is saying with HB 149.
HB 149 is designed to counter the indefinite detention provisions, sections 1021 and 1022, of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. These sections authorize the indefinite military detention, without charge or trial, of anyone who commits a “belligerent act,” or is suspected of terrorism, and violate over 13 provisions of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. the law has also been condemned by retired members of the Armed Forces, a current U.S. Congressman, Federal Judge Katherine B. Forrest, conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh, and the American Civil Liberties Union.
Rep. Larson’s bill, once amended, will protect the people of Texas from indefinite military detention and extrajudicial assassination without charge or trial. However, we have to get it through Committee first.
It’s time to bring the pressure. One call, and taking 30 seconds to tell your legislator what you think, can make all the difference.
Contact members of the Texas House Federalism and Fiscal Responsibility NOW and tell them, politely but firmly, you will accept nothing less than a YES on HB 149. (Out-of-staters are encouraged to call as well.)
Rep. Brandon Creighton:
(512) 463-0726
Rep. Cindy Burkett:
(512) 463-0464
Rep. Eddie Lucio III
(512) 463-0606
Rep. Scott Turner
(512) 463-0484
Rep. Armando Walle
(512) 463-0924
If you are in Texas, join PANDA, the Tenth Amendment Center, the Libertarian Party and other groups at the Committee Hearing!
12:00 PM CDT
Hearing Room E2036
Capitol Building
Austin, TX 78701
Let’s show the Federal government “you don’t mess with Texas.”
P.S. What kind of responses are you getting? We want to know. Post the reply you get in the comments section of this post so other people know what to expect.
Boris Berezovsky is dead! Syrian ‘rebels’ falling apart. Gilad Atzmon in Japan [video]
Ryan Dawson
March 25, 2013
PANDA Endorses H.R. 198
P.A.N.D.A. People Against The NDAA
March 23, 2013
On September 14, 2001, in the wake of one of America’s greatest national tragedies, Congress gave the President unilateral power to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks of 9-11.
On October 14th, 2011, a 16-year old American citizen from Colorado, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was blown to pieces by a hellfire missile. He had no connection to the terrorist attacks of 9-11.
The assassination of a 16-year old is just one of numerous examples of the overbroad interpretation of the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force. In response, a bipartisan group of U.S. Representatives led by Barbara Lee (D-CA) have introduced H.R. 198 to repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.
H.R. 198 reads as follows:
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Repeal of the Authorization for Use
of Military Force”.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDING.
Congress finds that the Authorization for Use of Military Force
(Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note), signed into law on September
18, 2001, has been used to justify a broad and open-ended authorization
for the use of military force and such an interpretation is
inconsistent with the authority of Congress to declare war and make all
laws for executing powers vested by the Constitution in the Government
of the United States.
SEC. 3. REPEAL OF PUBLIC LAW 107-40.
Effective 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C.
1541 note) is hereby repealed.”
Legislation like this is sorely needed to reign in the “war on terror” powers our Congress gave the President. The Authorization for Use of Military Force has given rise to the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), extrajudicial execution of U.S. citizens, and the expansion of Presidential war powers to a level never authorized in the Constitution.
PANDA wholeheartedly endorses H.R. 198 as introduced. We must restore Constitutional governance in the United States, and this bill will be a giant step in the right direction.
New Jersey Weedman – Fuck the law, smoke it anyway [video]
Adam VS The Man
March 25, 2013
Buy agorist! Get your metals from http://agoristmetals.com
Please address love mail to adam@adamvstheman.com
Donate Bitcoin: 1BWeuWdgjrP8PFAwBwgwU9BUqJNewScouy
Get your AVTM shirts here:
http://adamvstheman.com/gear
Invest here to support ADAM VS THE MAN!
http://adamvstheman.com/invest
CONFIRMED: US Shipping Weapons to Syria – Al Nusra’s “Mystery” Sponsors Revealed
by Tony Cartalucci
Land Destroyer
March 25, 2013 (LD) – While US President Barack Obama and the Western media lied in concert to the world regarding America’s role in supporting terrorists operating in Syria, it is now revealed that the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has been shipping weapons to Syria via NATO-member Turkey and Jordan since at least early 2012. The New York Times in their article titled, “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With C.I.A. Aid,” admits that:
With help from the C.I.A., Arab governments and Turkey have sharply increased their military aid to Syria’s opposition fighters in recent months, expanding a secret airlift of arms and equipment for the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad, according to air traffic data, interviews with officials in several countries and the accounts of rebel commanders.
The airlift, which began on a small scale in early 2012 and continued intermittently through last fall, expanded into a steady and much heavier flow late last year, the data shows. It has grown to include more than 160 military cargo flights by Jordanian, Saudi and Qatari military-style cargo planes landing at Esenboga Airport near Ankara, and, to a lesser degree, at other Turkish and Jordanian airports.
The New York Times piece attempts to spin America’s role in arming militants in Syria. The Times continues by stating:
The American government became involved, the former American official said, in part because there was a sense that other states would arm the rebels anyhow. The C.I.A. role in facilitating the shipments, he said, gave the United States a degree of influence over the process, including trying to steer weapons away from Islamist groups and persuading donors to withhold portable antiaircraft missiles that might be used in future terrorist attacks on civilian aircraft.
This is categorically false. Already, in 2007, US officials had divulged plans to destroy Syria by arming sectarian extremists, using Saudi Arabia and other regional actors as proxies to launder US and Israel support through – maintaining a degree of credibility amongst the terrorist receiving the aid, as well as a degree of plausible deniabiliy for Washington and Tel Aviv politically. In Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh’s 2007 New Yorker article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” the strategy was described as follows:
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
Perhaps more importantly, the report would also state:
Some of the core tactics of the redirection are not public, however. The clandestine operations have been kept secret, in some cases, by leaving the execution or the funding to the Saudis, or by finding other ways to work around the normal congressional appropriations process, current and former officials close to the Administration said.
[hat tip: End the Lie]
Senate Approves Internet Sales Tax by 3-to-1 Margin
Activist Post
March 24, 2013
The U.S. Senate voted yesterday to approve the concept of an Internet sales tax by an overwhelming 75-to-24 margin.
The vote was largely symbolic and non-binding, but its support has some wanting to bypass the committee process for the easy passage of the Marketplace Fairness Act, according to The Verge.
The law, which opponents more accurately call the “National Internet Tax Mandate”, would allow states to demand sales taxes from online retailers.
More exactly, “the Marketplace Fairness Act grants states the authority to compel online and catalog retailers (“remote sellers”), no matter where they are located, to collect sales tax at the time of a transaction,” according to a lobbyist website supporting the idea.
In its current form, Internet retailers with less than $1 million in sales would be exempt, which at first glance seems palatable. But consider that if a retailer only makes a 10 percent profit margin, then they only take home $100K net profit before expenses. That’s hardly a large company with the resources to learn a new system or hire someone to handle the extra bookkeeping.
Even foreign retailers (no matter where they are located) will have to charge, account for, and remit sales taxes for customers who may reside in a participating U.S. state. It doesn’t matter that the retailer has no attachment to the customer’s state or country for that matter. Can anyone see how this may hinder commerce freedom for U.S. customers?
“Collecting sales tax is—or rather should be—simply part of selling online, just as it’s part of selling on Main Street,” argue the lobbyists, adding “Collecting sales tax? That’s just part of doing business.”
Furthermore, the customer must now pay sales tax on every single item they buy while residing in a certain state regardless of where they bought it from. The lobbyists say you should be okay with that because “As a consumer, the sales tax you pay funds projects and services in your community.”
Large e-tailers like Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Home Depot, and Target have lobbied for the tax. Of course, they also have brick-and-mortar storefronts, but their online sales have jumped in recent years.
This new regulation tax is precisely how small businesses are regulated out of the brick-and-mortar marketplace. They start with small, seemingly reasonable requests which are sometimes quasi-voluntary like this proposal, then bit by bit the regulations become mandatory and they keep squeezing for more.
The lobbyists for this bill argue it will be good for all businesses. “Thousands of businesses are forced to do business at a competitive disadvantage because they have to collect taxes and online sellers do not, which in some states can mean a 5 to 10% price advantage,” they claim.
However, clearly they weren’t talking about small online retailers which employs untold millions of workers.
It’s dangerous to even open the door to this type of intrusion into the Internet free market. Internet entrepreneurs everywhere should be protesting this law.
Read other articles by Activist Post Here
Bong adventure at Smoke Down Prohibition III [video]
Adam VS The Man
March 24, 2013
Buy agorist! Get your metals from http://agoristmetals.com
Please address love mail to adam@adamvstheman.com
Donate Bitcoin: 1BWeuWdgjrP8PFAwBwgwU9BUqJNewScouy
Get your AVTM shirts here:
http://adamvstheman.com/gear
Invest here to support ADAM VS THE MAN!
http://adamvstheman.com/invest

