May 1 proclamed “Loyalty Day” by Obama OR How To Transform May 1 in An Ode To “DEAR LEADER”

A New Presidential Proclamation Ironically Declares May 1 Loyalty Day

 

By Brent Daggett

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,” stated author and philosopher Francois-Marie d’ Arouet (pen name Voltaire).

On May 1, 2012 President Barack Obama signed a proclamation stating that May 1 will now be reserved for “Loyalty Day.”

With everything we are seeing in this nation, especially when it comes to the government’s establishment of so-called FEMA camps and the recently exposed Internment and Resettlement Operations Manual, it seems the government is the one being disloyal to the Constitution and the founding principles of the United States of America.

For more info on the recently exposed manual, watch this video:

A press release on WhiteHouse.gov goes into more elaborate detail on the importance of the day.

“The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

May 01, 2012

Presidential Proclamation — Loyalty Day, 2012

LOYALTY DAY, 2012

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

More than two centuries ago, our Founders laid out a charter that assured the rule of law and the rights of man. Through times of tranquility and the throes of change, the Constitution has always guided our course toward fulfilling that most noble promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve the chance to pursue their full measure of happiness. America has carried on not only for the skill or vision of history’s celebrated figures, but also for the generations who have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebears and true to our founding documents. On Loyalty Day, we reflect on that proud heritage and press on in the long journey toward prosperity for all.

In the years since our Constitution was penned and ratified, Americans have moved our Nation forward by embracing a commitment to each other, to the fundamental principles that unite us, and to the future we share. We weathered the storms of civil war and segregation, of conflicts that spanned continents. We overcame threats from within and without — from the specter of fascism abroad to the bitter injustice of disenfranchisement at home. We upheld the spirit of service at the core of our democracy, and we widened the circle of opportunity not just for a privileged few, but for the ambitious many. Time and again, men and women achieved what seemed impossible by joining imagination to common purpose and necessity to courage. That legacy still burns brightly, and the ideals it embodies remain a light to all the world.

Countless Americans demonstrate that same dedication to country today. It endures in the hearts of all who put their lives on the line to defend the land they love, just as it moves millions to improve their communities through volunteerism and civic participation. Their actions help ensure prosperity for this generation and those yet to come, and they honor the immutable truths enshrined in our Nation’s founding texts. On Loyalty Day, we rededicate ourselves to the common good, to the cornerstones of liberty, equality, and justice, and to the unending pursuit of a more perfect Union.

In order to recognize the American spirit of loyalty and the sacrifices that so many have made for our Nation, the Congress, by Public Law 85-529 as amended, has designated May 1 of each year as “Loyalty Day.” On this day, let us reaffirm our allegiance to the United States of America, our Constitution, and our founding values.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 1, 2012, as Loyalty Day. This Loyalty Day, I call upon all the people of the United States to join in support of this national observance, whether by displaying the flag of the United States or pledging allegiance to the Republic for which it stands.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-sixth.”

BARACK OBAMA

Before going into detail regarding the pledge of allegiance, let’s define loyalty.

Loyalty encompasses these definitions:

“1. The state or quality of being loyal; faithfulness to commitments or obligations.

2. Faithful adherence to a sovereign, government, leader, cause, etc.

3. An example or instance of faithfulness, adherence, or the like: a man with fierce loyalties.”

Now let’s explore the history of the Pledge of Allegiance

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

While the Pledge of Allegiance, written by Francis Bellamy (who was a Christian socialist) has taken on many forms since its inception in 1892, the history is alarming.

Instead of giving a long drawn out history lesson, I recommend viewing these videos on YouTube:

The information is provided on RexCurry.net.  Dr. Rex Curry is an attorney and is in private practice specializing in criminal law.

Curry is also an authority on the Bellamy’s with such tomes as “Looking Backward,” (Edward Bellamy), “Pledge of Allegiance,” (Francis Bellamy).

“Acts of Allegiance”

Patriot Act-   According to the American Civil Liberties Union, “on May 26, 2011, Congress passed a four-year extension of three expiring Patriot Act provisions without making much-needed changes to the overly broad surveillance bill. The extended provisions are set now set to expire on June 1, 2015.”  More can be seen in their detailed report Reclaiming Patriotism

  • Section 215 of the Patriot Act authorizes the government to obtain “any tangible thing” relevant to a terrorism investigation, even if there is no showing that the “thing” pertains to suspected terrorists or terrorist activities. This provision is contrary to traditional notions of search and seizure, which require the government to show reasonable suspicion or probable cause before undertaking an investigation that infringes upon a person’s privacy. Congress must ensure that things collected with this power have a meaningful nexus to suspected terrorist activity or it should be allowed to expire.
  • Section 206 of the Patriot Act, also known as “roving John Doe wiretap”provision, permits the government to obtain intelligence surveillance orders that identify neither the person nor the facility to be tapped. This provision is contrary to traditional notions of search and seizure, which require government to state with particularity what it seeks to search or seize. Section 206 should be amended to mirror similar and longstanding criminal laws that permit roving wiretaps, but require the naming of a specific target. Otherwise, it should expire.
  • Section 6001 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, or the so-called “Lone Wolf” provision, permits secret intelligence surveillance of non-US persons who are not affiliated with a foreign organization. Such an authorization, granted only in secret courts is subject to abuse and threatens our longtime understandings of the limits of the government’s investigatory powers within the borders of the United States. This provision has never been used and should be allowed to expire outright.

The bill also fails to amend other portions of the Patriot Act in dire need of reform, most notably those relating to the issuance and use of national security letters (NSLs).

NSLs permit the government to obtain the communication, financial and credit records of anyone deemed relevant to a terrorism investigation even if that person is not suspected of unlawful behavior.

Numerous Department of Justice Inspector General reports have confirmed that tens of thousands of these letters are issued every year and they are used to collect information on people two and three times removed from a terrorism suspect.

NSLs also come with a nondisclosure requirement that precludes a court from determining whether the gag is necessary to protect national security.

The NSL provisions should be amended so that they collect information only on suspected terrorists and the gag should be modified to permit meaningful court review for those who wish to challenge nondisclosure orders.”

Military Commission Act- MCA was signed into law by President Bush on October 17, 2006.  Below is a detailed summary, as written on the Center for Constitutional Rights website.

“THE LAW

The Military Commissions Act4:

_ Creates a broad definition of “unlawful enemy combatant” [Sec. 3(a)(1), amending § 948(a)(1)];

_ Severely limits the avenues of judicial review for non-citizens held in U.S. custody, aiming to

eliminate both habeas and post-release civil challenges, thus effectively sanctioning indefinite

detention and abusive interrogations of non-citizens and limiting accountability [Sec. 7];

_ Permits coercive interrogations and torture by creating narrow re-definitions, limiting judicial

review, and allowing for statements obtained under torture or coercion to be used in

prosecutions in some instances [Sec. 3(a)(1), amending §§ 948r, 949a(b)(2)(C), 949d(f)(2)(B-C),

949j(c)(2), 950v(b)(11), 950v(b)(12); Sec. 6(b)(1)(B); Sec. 6(b)(2); Sec. 6(c); Sec. 7];

_ Authorizes military commissions which do not satisfy fundamental due process requirements

and with procedures which deviate markedly from criminal trials in civilian courts, courts-martial

under military law, and international criminal trials [Sec. 3(a)(1), amending §§ 948b(d), 948j,

948q(b), 948r, 949a(b), 949c(b)(4), 949d(d-f), 949j(c-d), 950b, 950c, 950f, 950p(a), 950v(b); Sec.

4(b)];

_ Narrows the scope of the War Crimes Act, the U.S. mechanism for criminal prosecution of war

crimes [Sec. 6];

_ Narrows the definitions of rape and sexual assault or abuse in defining crimes triable by military

commission or subject to prosecution under the War Crimes Act [Sec. 3(a)(1), amending §

950v(21-22); Sec. 6(b)];

_ Confers retroactive immunity on some U.S. officials who have engaged in illegal actions which

have been authorized by the Executive [Sec. 6(b)(2); Sec. 7; Sec. 8]; and

_ Limits the use of international law in U.S. courts [Sec. 3(a)(1), amending §§ 948b(f), 948b(g); Sec.

5(a); Sec. 6].”

Medical Marijuana Raids – “… The administration has unleashed an interagency cannabis crackdown that goes beyond anything seen under the Bush administration, with more than 100 raids, primarily on California pot dispensaries, many of them operating in full compliance with state laws.

Since October 2009, the Justice Department has conducted more than 170 aggressive SWAT-style raids in 9 medical marijuana states, resulting in at least 61 federal indictments, according to data compiled by Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group.”

This passage appears in the Huffington Post article Obama Explains Increasing Medical Marijuana Crackdowns, Raids In ‘Rolling Stone’ Interview on April 25, 2012.

Despite being a small list, let us not forget codex alimentarius, the war on terror, raiding of Amish farmers who produce raw milk and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, etc.

While with Obama in the White house our nation has progressed in certain areas, the fact remains certain rights (or should I write privileges?) are withering by the wayside in the name of sacrificing freedom for security.

If the government can wield its power and seemingly exert their will upon us without our consent, then they are guilty of manipulating the foundation of loyalty in their favor.

As Thomas Paine once echoed, “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.”

We should never be afraid to question, after all, what a society is without the right to speak freely.

To me, loyalty or patriotism is not submitting to blind allegiance, blind religion or forced indoctrination.  A true patriot questions frivolous laws to preserve liberty, just as our founding fathers did.

With that being stated, I will now conclude with the words of Judge Andrew Napolitano from the essay, What if the Constitution No Longer Applied?

Appearing on LewRockwell.com on November 30, 2011:

“What if the whole purpose of the Constitution was to limit the government? What if Congress’ enumerated powers in the Constitution no longer limited Congress, but were actually used as justification to extend Congress’ authority over every realm of human life?

What if the president, meant to be an equal to Congress, has become a democratically elected, term-limited monarch? What if the president assumed everything he did was legal, just because he’s the president?

What if he could interrupt your regularly scheduled radio and TV programming for a special message from him? What if he could declare war on his own? What if he could read your emails and texts without a search warrant? What if he could kill you without warning?

What if the rights and principles guaranteed in the Constitution have been so distorted in the past 200 years as to be unrecognizable by the Founders? What if the states were mere provinces of a totally nationalized and fully centralized government?

What if the Constitution was amended stealthily, not by constitutional amendments duly passed by the states, but by the constant and persistent expansion of the federal government’s role in our lives? What if the federal government decided whether its own powers were proper and constitutional?

What if you needed a license from the government to speak, to assemble or to protest the government? What if the right to keep and bear arms only applied to the government? What if posse comitatus – the law that prohibits our military from our streets – were no longer in effect?

What if the government considered the military an adequate dispenser of domestic law enforcement? What if cops looked and acted like troops and you couldn’t distinguish the military from the police? What if federal agents could write their own search warrants in defiance of the Constitution? What if the government could decide when you weren’t entitled to a jury trial?

What if the government could take your property whenever it wanted it? What if the government could continue prosecuting you until it got the verdict it wanted? What if the government could force you to testify against yourself simply by labeling you a domestic terrorist

What if the government could torture you until you said what the government wanted to hear? What if people running for president actually supported torture? What if the government tortured your children to get to you?

What if the government could send you to your death and your innocence meant nothing so long as the government’s procedures were followed? What if America’s prison population, the largest in the world, was the result of a cruel and unusual way for a country to be free? What if half the prison population never harmed anyone but themselves?

What if the people had no rights except those the government chose to let them have? What if the states had no rights except to do as the federal government commanded? What if our elected officials didn’t really live among us, but all instead had their hearts and their homes in Washington, D.C.?

What if the government could strip you of your rights because of where your mother was when you were born? What if the income tax was unconstitutional? What if the states were convinced to give up their representation in Congress? What if the government tried to ban you from using a substance older than the government itself? What if voting didn’t mean anything anymore because both political parties stand for Big Government?

What if the government could write any law, regulate any behavior and tax any event, the Constitution be damned? What if the government was the reason we don’t have a Constitution anymore? What if you could love your country but hate what the government has done to it?

What if sometimes to love your country, you had to alter or abolish the government? What if Jefferson was right? What if that government is best which governs least? What if I’m right? What if the government is wrong? What if it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong? What if it is better to perish fighting for freedom than to live as a slave? What if freedom’s greatest hour of danger is now?”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s