Time: Fri Oct 17 21:28:59 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA01982;
	Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:27:34 -0700 (MST)
	by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA00327;
	Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:25:37 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:26:39 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: EXECUTIVE ORDERS: Bonfire for the Constitution (Part I)

>From: "Chris W. Stark - GOA Texas Rep." <gunowner@OnRamp.NET>
>Organization: Gun Owners of America -Texas Representative
>Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:58:27 +0000
>Subject: EXECUTIVE ORDERS: Bonfire for the Constitution (Part I)
>                        EXECUTIVE ORDERS:
>                   Bonfire for the Constitution
>                            (Part I)
>    On June 3, 1994, President Clinton signed Executive Orde r#12919 
>gathering together into a single document all the power and athority 
>of a multitude of Executive Ordersissued by preceding presidents from 
>John Kennedy on. Recent examination of this Executive Order has 
>brought to light that the consolidation of previous presidential 
>orders deliver unprecedented authority into the hands of the Chief 
>Executive that exceed those powers granted him under the U.S. 
>   Incorporated under the aegis of President Clinton's EO #12919 
>are powers originally claimed by President Kennedy in a series of 
>Executive Orders signed into "law"in February of 1962 which, if 
>invoked, would virtually suspend the greater portion of liberties 
>guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
>   In Section 3 of Kennedy's original EO #10995 entitled, "ASSIGNING
>"Such authority shall include the power to amend modify, or revoke
>frequency assignments." Innocuous as this sounds, it embodies the
>power of the Chief Executive, in time of "national emergency", to
>seize control of all radio and other telecommunications.
>   On the same day that President Kennedy signed EO #10995, he also
>gave birth to four successive Orders that Clinton included in his EO 
>containing provisions to disable constitutional rights. Executive 
>Order #10997 empowers the Secretary of the Interior to seize all 
>energy production facilities--specifically, "electrical power", 
>"petroleum", "gas", "solid fuels", and "minerals". Section 3, 
>subsection (d) of that order, entitled "Claimancy" states:
>     Prepare plans to claim materials, manpower, equipment, supplies
>     and services needed in support of assigned responsibilities and
>     other essential functions of the Department...to insure
>     availability of such resources in an emergency. [emphasis and
>     supplied]
>   Note the word "claim" in reference to "materials, manpower, 
>equipment, supplies and services". The legal definition, as supplied 
>by Black's Law Dictionary is, "To demand as one's own or as one's 
>right...means by or through which claimant obtains possession or 
>enjoyment of a privilege or thing. Demand for money or property as of 
>a right...." This means that the government may, upon declaration of 
>a state of local or national emergency, seize any of the above, 
>private or otherwise, including "manpower".
>   As to what constitutes a national emergency again Black's
>definition is quite revealing:
>     "A state of national crisis; a situation demanding immediate and
>     extraordinary national or federal action. Congress has made
>     little or no distinction between a "state of national emergency"
>     and a "state of war." Brown v. Bernstein, D.C.Pa., 49 F.Supp.
>     728, 732. [emphasis supplied]
>   EO #10998 places all food resources under authority of the
>Secretary of Agriculture.
>   EO #10999 invests the Secretary of Commerce with control over all
>means of transportation, public and private.
>   EO #11000 provides for the establishment of manpower resources at
>the discretion of the Secretary of Labor, with the authority to 
>"claim" services (labor) and involuntary relocation of workers. 
>Collateral authority for this conscription of labor is given in Title 
>50 app. United States Code, Section 2153 "WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENCE" 
>under the section addressing civilian dispositionentitled, "DEFENSE 
>PRODUCTION ACT OF 1950" in which is set forth that civilian personnel 
>may be assigned work without regard to payment or reimbursement.
>   It is important to note that according to the "War and Emergency
>Powers Act" the United States has legally been under a state of 
>national emergency since its enactment in 1933. It has never been 
>repealed, thus leaving the president with instant powers to suspend 
>the constitution. Most legal scholars and legislators whohave studied 
>the matter concur that the War and Emergency Powers Act has, in 
>reality, already suspended the Constitution since the moment the act 
>was signed into law by President Roosevelt. The actual suspension of 
>those consitutional rights awaits only the impetus of a national 
>emergency requiring it.
>   In 1933 a U.S. Congressman entered the following statement into 
>the Congressional Record:
>     "I think of all the damnable heresies that have ever been
>     suggested in connection with the Constitution, the doctrine of
>     emergency is the worst. It means that when Congress declares an
>     emergency, there is no Constitution. This means its death. It is
>     the very doctrine that the German chancellor is invoking today in
>     the dying hours of the parliamentary body of the German republic,
>     namely, that because of an emergency, it should grant to the
>     German chancellor absolute power to pass any law, even though the
>     law contradicts the Constitution of the German republic.
>     Chancellor Hitler is at least frank about it. We pay the
>     Constitution lipservice, but the result is the same....the
>     Constitution of the United States, as a restraining influence in
>     keeping the federal government within the carefully prescribed
>     channels of power, is moribund, if not dead."
>   The introduction to Senate Report 93-549, entered into the
>Congressional Record forty years later in 1973 states:
>     "A majority of the people of the United States have lived all
>     their lives under emergency rule....For 40 years, freedoms and
>     governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in
>     varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by
>     states of national emergency....And, in the United States,
>     actions taken by the government in times of great crisis have
>     from, at least, the Civil War, in important ways shaped the
>     present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency."
>   Following the introduction the report's opening statement goes 
>on to say:
>     "Since March the 9th, 1933, the United States has been in a state
>     of declared national emergency....This vast range of powers,
>     taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country
>     without reference to normal constitutional processes. Under the
>     powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize
>     property; organize and control the means of production; seize
>     commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial
>     law; seize and control all transportation and communication;
>     regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel;
>     and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all
>     American citizens."
>   Not overlooked by those drafting the Constitution was the possible
>need to address national emergencies. The document contains certain 
>provisions indicating that its signatories conceived of the 
>possibility that some guarantees of personal liberties may,in the 
>national interest, require suspension.
>   Article 1, Section 9 states: The privilege of the writ of habeas
>corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion [an 
>internal occurrence] or invasion [external] the public safety require 
>it."  This grants the citizen the freedom from imprisonment or 
>detention without due process. The proviso "unless when in casesof 
>rebellion or invasion the public safety require it" indicates the 
>necessity to provide for some contingencies that may also carry with 
>them the possibility for abuse. No document of liberty, however, 
>could possibly proscribe all potential for misuse of those liberties 
>without actually eliminating them in the process. It has been said 
>that communism is nothing more than democrasy with all potential for 
>abuse legislated out.
>   As a result of the Executive Orders listed above, in concert with
>the War and Emergency Powers Act, there exists within the United 
>States a government within a government. It is hidden, semi-covert in 
>nature, and does not recognize the U.S. Constitution or its 
>constraints. It functions autonomously as a form of totalitarian 
>regime in suspended animation, awaiting its time of activation. It is 
>a government driven by presidential Executive Orders to be executed 
>by federal agencies run by non-elected officials.
>   Executive Orders amount to ready-wired buttons by which the
>president can suspend constitutional rights at any moment he 
>determines that a "national emergency" exists. The great problem 
>inherent is that no binding legal definition exists asto what 
>constitutes a "national emergency". That definition lies entirely 
>with the Chief Executive. When he declares a state of emergency, the 
>aforementioned documents can be used to activate whatever federal 
>agency is most suited to address the emergency. Those agencies 
>include, but are not limited to, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and 
>Firearms (BATF), the FBI and the Federal Emergency Management 
>Administration (FEMA).
>   Because this nation is under a continual state of emergency due to
>the War and Eergency Powers Act, and the Constitution granting 
>somewhat elastic powers of emergency in "cases of rebellion or 
>invasion", the president can circumvent such fundamental protections 
>as thePosse Comatatus Act which forbids the use of the military 
>against U.S. citizens.
>   This slow motion decay of constitutional rights was not unforeseen
>by the Founding Fathers. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, James 
>Madison once wrote, I believe there are more instances of abridgment 
>of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those 
>in power than by violent and sudden usurpations...."
>   The Constitution of the United States of America, once the hub of
>American law and freedoms, has been moved to the position of the 
>hubcap. It has become merely an ornamental relic that serves no real 
>function other than that of making the American people feel as if the 
>document still matters to those who govern.
>   It appears that the modern electorate chooses their leaders for the
>same purpose that they attend a magic show. Their actual desire seems 
>to be that the performer deceive them.
>           "The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule
>           by their money; and my people love to have it so: and what 
>           will ye do in the end thereof?"
>                                   Jer 5:31
>                          Copyright c 1997, The WINDS.
>                              ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
>                            http://www.TheWinds.org

Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris      : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01
B.A.: Political Science, UCLA;   M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02
tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04
website: http://supremelaw.com       : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best 06
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone 07
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this 08
_____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall 10
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11
======================================================================== 12
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] 13


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail