http://kstp.com/…

Police are investigating vicious graffiti written on the homes of six Minnesota politicians–a mix of both democratic and republican lawmakers. Now, one of them is personally offering a $1,000 reward to find the suspects.

It began with a report of graffiti in the Crocus Hill neighborhood in St. Paul, written on the garage of Sen. Norm Coleman.

Words sprayed in black paint read, ‘you are a criminal resign or else’; ‘SCUM,’ which is written three times; and ‘Psalm 2.’

Across the Metro, at least five other lawmakers’ homes were damaged overnight. The case now may point to a non-partisan group, as both democratic and republican politicians were hit.

“I think it’s clearly a terroristic threat. It looked like someone went way out of their way to do a hateful act,” Ellison told 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS as he viewed the vandalism on his home for the first time.

Can’t say I feel sorry for these politicians. They support a fascist state and are backing people into corners. Given the scope of their involvement and the greater and greater effect they have on the average person’s life they should expect more this to occur. Why are the militias growing, your home vandalized and the letters to your office increasing? Why is the approval rating of the Congress the lowest ever? Because you exert your believes on others through violence and the threat of violence. It’s the same reason real terrorists attack this country and why militias in Iraq are attacking US troops. Your inability to understand this basic human… animal response is why we are in so much trouble currently.

UPDATE:

I went to the YouTube user’s page illchemist07 to see what other videos they had. While watching NEW WORLD ORDER THIS IS WAR ! - American Resistance/Militia Rise I noticed at 2:12 a photo of the back of a jacket which read “DEATH TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER” and had an all seeing eye with a circle and bar through it. It looks like a Ron Paul Rally. Looks like the Philladelphia Ron Paul rally. Looks like the photo Laur or I took. Because it is.

I’ve no problem with people using anything from this site… but I’d appreciate being informed in its use.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/…

Morgan Jones once built a tank out of scrap metal and drove it to church.

During annual potluck parties at his backwoods Clarion County home, he often wowed guests with his homemade flamethrower.

And sometimes, just for fun, he’d entertain friends by shooting an electrical charge through his body to light a bulb.

His wife, Donna, says he’s a little eccentric.

“I never thought it was illegal to be eccentric,” she said. “He’s a good man. He’s not a terrorist or a domestic threat.”

Agents from the federal Joint Terrorism Task Force thought otherwise when they arrested Jones last month as he left Sunday Mass in the sleepy hamlet of Lucinda.

Jones, 64, was charged with selling a Romanian AK-47 assault rifle to an undercover agent posing as an Ohio resident.

Later, when agents headed down a bumpy, macadam road to Jones’ modular home, they found an array of homemade weapons, a cannon, drums of explosive chemicals and a depleted uranium shell. The military often uses uranium shells because they penetrate tank armor.

Officials allege Jones is a major player in a militia movement whose shadowy members have a “propensity toward violence” against the government, elected officials, judges and law enforcement.

“Propensity toward violence?! That’s our job!!” “Militia? That’s something the government is supposed to handle subject citizen! Ignore the ‘bad eggs’ tazing people, the check points, the NAU, the creeping police state. We will protect you.”

Read More…

http://www.cqpolitics.com/…

Two former secretaries of State unveiled a plan Tuesday to require better consultation between Congress and the president over sending U.S. troops into war.

The legislation, the product of a blue-ribbon commission headed by James A. Baker III, secretary of State under President George Bush, and Warren Christopher, who held the same office under President Bill Clinton, would establish a joint congressional committee and require that the president consult with its members before sending the military into battle.

“This statute gives Congress a seat at the table in deciding whether or not to go to war — not just a seat at the table, but one with a permanent staff, a permanent professional staff, and access to all the available intelligence information,” Christopher said.

Christopher and Baker urged Congress and a new administration to quickly take up their proposal, and said they had reached out to the campaigns of Sens. Barack Obama , D-Ill., and John McCain , R-Ariz.

The plan also would require Congress to vote on a concurrent resolution to authorize the conflict within 30 days after military action begins. If that resolution fails, it would allow an expedited vote on a joint resolution of disapproval, which would become law only with the president’s signature or over his or her veto.

Any military action expected to last more than a week would require consultation, and formal consultation would continue every two months. If action requires secrecy, the president would have to consult within three days after the action began. Covert operations, humanitarian missions, limited reprisal against terrorists and repelling attacks on the United States would be exempt.

Under the Constitution, only Congress can declare war. However, since the end of World War II, presidents have committed the U.S. military to several conflicts without asking for declarations of war, though in some cases Congress has enacted authorizing resolutions, as it did in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Congress also has the power to limit spending for military operations, though it could be politically difficult to do so once U.S. troops have been committed to a conflict.

The proposal would replace the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which the commission concluded was ineffective at best and unconstitutional at worst.

OHHH. I see what they are saying. Congress does have a say. They just don’t bother to use that power. Nor do they use the power to impeach and try the president for high crimes of going to war without a declaration. Lets take a look at that “Constitution” thing they speak of.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11: The Congress shall have the Power To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8: Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Article 2, Section 4, Clause 1: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Seems pretty clear to me. “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.” He is the Commander in Chief only when the Congress calls the Army, Navy and/or Militia of the several States into actual service. When can they be called into service? When the Congress declares war, “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.” That’s it as far as I can tell.

And what did James Madison say on the topic?

In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department. Beside the objection to such a mixture to heterogeneous powers, the trust and the temptation would be too great for any one man; not such as nature may offer as the prodigy of many centuries, but such as may be expected in the ordinary successions of magistracy. War is in fact the true nurse of executive aggrandizement. In war, a physical force is to be created; and it is the executive will, which is to direct it. In war, the public treasures are to be unlocked; and it is the executive hand which is to dispense them. In war, the honours and emoluments of office are to be multiplied; and it is the executive patronage under which they are to be enjoyed. It is in war, finally, that laurels are to be gathered; and it is the executive brow they are to encircle. The strongest passions and most dangerous weaknesses of the human breast; ambition, avarice, vanity, the honourable or venial love of fame, are all in conspiracy against the desire and duty of peace.

Hence it has grown into an axiom that the executive is the department of power most distinguished by its propensity to war: hence it is the practice of all states, in proportion as they are free, to disarm this propensity of its influence.

So it seems even more obvious that Congress not only has a say but it is the only voice. Will such a setup as proposed fix anything? I don’t see how. The more strict and constitutional ways for military deployment has failed for decades. This plan has no teeth. Hell, the president can veto the “joint resolution of disapproval.” Even if the president couldn’t what would that do? It’s just a disapproval resolution. It sounds like a UN security council resolution. There is nothing to back it up.