Bill would allow DHS total Police State power over most of the United States

[rambone]

DHS already has asserted the power to stop, search and detain anyone, for any reason within the “Constitution Free Zone,” resident or traveler. This area is defined by anywhere within 100 miles of any international border. The majority of the population lives in this zone.

A new Federal bill, H.R. 1505, will also give DHS the power to use surveillance, monitoring equipment, erect walls, and send out patrols ANYWHERE within 100 miles of the international border (oceans, Indian reservations, embassies, United Nations, etc). Homeland Security will have no restrictions at all within Federally owned land, which makes up a large percentage of the U.S. landmass.

Republican Sponsored H.R. 1505 Would give DHS Police State Powers over 80% of the U.S.

If you live within 100 miles of any ocean, you’re in the “zone.”
If you live within 100 miles of the United Nations in New York City, you’re in the “zone.”
If you live within 100 miles of the Canadian or Mexican border, you’re in the “zone.”
If you live within 100 miles of a foreign embassy, consulate, or declared international trade zone with foreign ownership, you’re in the “zone.”

Maps: U.S. Public Lands Covered by H.R. 1505

Assault on Public Lands and Environmental Laws up for a House Vote

Bishop’s bill would also give DHS the run of all federally owned lands, in all 50 states, with absolutely no restrictions. Has a lack of access to the Everglades, or Hawaii’s Volcanoes National Park, or the lawn around the Statue of Liberty, prevented DHS from securing the southern border? Not according to the Border Patrol.

The irony is that the Border Patrol, which operates under DHS’ umbrella, has not asked for the power to overrule land managers or ignore environmental laws. Last spring the Government Accountability Office found that, “Most agents reported that land management laws have had no effect on Border Patrol’s overall measure of border security.”

The official summary of the bill:

H.R. 1505: National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act (GovTrack.us)

Prohibits the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA) from taking action on public lands which impede the border security activities of the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) (Secretary). States that the Secretary shall have immediate access to any public land managed by the federal government in order to conduct activities that assist in securing the border (including access to maintain and construct roads, construct a fence, use patrol vehicles, and set up monitoring equipment). States that a specified waiver by the Secretary of certain laws regarding sections of the international border between the United States and Mexico and between the United States and Canada shall apply to all sections of the international land and maritime borders of the United States within 100 miles of such borders with respect to the Secretary's activities under this Act.

Are You Living in a Constitution Free Zone?

 

[rambone]

 

[blamecharles]

They really do want a revolution don't they?

 

[Constructionist]

They really do want a revolution don't they?

They're probably hoping that once these new laws are in effect, a small uprising or disturbance will be reason enough to put the finishing touches on complete totalitarianism.

 

[J_Wales]

Well, remember when fearless leader said he wanted a civilian force as strong as the military? Here we go!

DHS is evolving into nothing more than brown shirted thugs in a different colored shirt.

DHS CAN GO TO HELL!

 

[firehawk1]

They really do want a revolution don't they?

In all honesty, there will be NO revolution. It is WAY too late for wishful thinking like that. Any and all possible violent revolutionary attempts would be crushed in a heartbeat.

Any possible Constitutional (read nonviolent) revolution cannot be accomplished at the ballot box either. Why do you think they have attempted and succeeded for decades to make as many totally dependent on the federal government as they could. Very very few if any of the dependent (read sheep) would vote to change a thing. They believe the handouts can just continue forever. When those end, as they will eventually have to, THERE will be your violence, and that type of revolution will NOT bring back a Representative Republic.

There are many more IN the wagon than pulling it. The one's IN the wagon won't rock the boat no matter what happens. Why would they, they know no freedom, they are slaves to Uncle Sam already.

 

[RockofStrength]

They really do want a revolution don't they?

I'm sure they tremble at the thought of a few thousand going against their well trained armies, to say nothing of the population that depends on them for daily bread.

 

[cobber]

I'm sure they tremble at the thought of a few thousand going against their well trained armies, to say nothing of the population that depends on them for daily bread.

The Tsar's army didn't exactly prevent that revolution. Armies are made up of citizens, not robots. I don't see an American army making war on the people (never mind that Bonus March stuff).

 

[RockofStrength]

The Tsar's army didn't exactly prevent that revolution. Armies are made up of citizens, not robots. I don't see an American army making war on the people (never mind that Bonus March stuff).

The people will not rise. The people like welfare, they like the big government. That's the point. Any revolution would be from a few malcontents who want to live free and work for their house and their bread (like us, I suppose). The army would merely be protecting the people, at that point.

 

[firehawk1]

I don't see an American army making war on the people (never mind that Bonus March stuff).

Maybe not, but do you think this current bunch in the White House would have ANY real problem asking the UN to do it? I don't if they really felt threatened.

 

[cobber]

Maybe not, but do you think this current bunch in the White House would have ANY real problem asking the UN to do it? I don't if they really felt threatened.

I don't see the US military sitting by while the blue berets from Fiji and Norway move in. I can't see the UN doing anything of the kind, unless the US Armed Forces were pacified and disarmed.

When we get to that point the SHTF has already descended on us. At which point the societies in Fiji and Norway will probably be having problems of their own.

I notice the sponsors of this bill are overwhelmingly Republicans. How many of them are Tea Party?

 

[Bummer]

Do you guys really think a party-line Republican would have any more trouble with that than the guy who's there now? Sure, they might not have the UN do it, but there's little doubt even a pro-Constitution uprising would be declared an act of terrorism. Even the Tea Partiers aren't big fans of that inconvenient Constitution. Just look at who they'll vote for.

Break out the rubber-stamp. Roll the tanks. Send in Special Forces. Launch the drones, we have a precedent or three, and that's good enough.

 

[jblomenberg16]

Do you guys really think a party-line Republican would have any more trouble with that than the guy who's there now? Sure, they might not have the UN do it, but there's little doubt even a pro-Constitution uprising would be declared an act of terrorism. Even the Tea Partiers aren't big fans of that inconvenient Constitution. Just look at who they'll vote for.

Break out the rubber-stamp. Roll the tanks. Send in Special Forces. Launch the drones, we have a precedent or three, and that's good enough.

Can you cite anything, or back this up with facts? Reason I ask is that the Tea Party information that I've seen and heard locally typically involves handing out copies of the Constitution, with much of the message being focused on getting the government back to only what is clearly enumerated in the Constitution.

 

[Bummer]

Cite anything? How about the INGO Politics forum? I read far more than I post, and what I read depresses me. Everywhere I turn it's "Follow the Constitution, but it doesn't really mean that."

As with any other group, some Tea Partiers will be real Constitutionalists. The majority? Really? Will they not vote for whichever Republican the majority chooses to run, Constitutionalist or not? If so, are they not just Republicans?

 

[gunowner930]

I seriously doubt a UN "invasion" of America will occur anytime soon. However, i don't see the US military standing idly by while it happens, and If you've studied some of the militaries that make UN "peacekeepers" and they're laughable at best. There is a big difference between well-trained professional troops and guys with guns that spray-fire AKs over their heads.

 

[Bummer]

Did anyone refuse to act on the "threat" of the Branch Davidians? Did Lon Horiuchi (sp?) not shoot Vicki Weaver in the head? Who said "No we can't just kill US citizens." stopping the recent drone attacks? But they were terrorists? Yes, when the government fears us, aren't we all? There'll be no need to send for the UN. And that was before there was a "Department of der Vaterland." Er, Родина. Er, obviously I meant Homeland.

 

[hornadylnl]

What exactly would our military do to stop a UN invasion?

 

[dlbrown75]

Maybe not, but do you think this current bunch in the White House would have ANY real problem asking the UN to do it? I don't if they really felt threatened.

Our masters have already signed an agreement with Canada to use their troops on our soil for a national emergency situation, and our troops on their soil. They have already prepared.

 

[cobber]

Did anyone refuse to act on the "threat" of the Branch Davidians? Did Lon Horiuchi (sp?) not shoot Vicki Weaver in the head? Who said "No we can't just kill US citizens." stopping the recent drone attacks? But they were terrorists? Yes, when the government fears us, aren't we all? There'll be no need to send for the UN. And that was before there was a "Department of der Vaterland." Er, Родина. Er, obviously I meant Homeland.

Actually DHS comes out eerily close to KGB, Committee of State Security (Komitet Gosudarstennoi Besopasnosti), a highly efficient Soviet state organ. The use of the word "homeland" in DHS is disturbingly close to the Russian rodina, or Nazi Vaterland. I wonder that no one saw that when playing the name game.

Just what America needed.

Our masters have already signed an agreement with Canada to use their troops on our soil for a national emergency situation, and our troops on their soil. They have already prepared.

Canadian Forces total what? The Michigan National Guard is probably larger in numbers and comparably or better-equipped. If I were Canadian I would worry more about US troops going north of the 49th parallel.

 

[hornadylnl]

Again, what is our military going to do to prevent a foreign invasion if our government is the one who initiates it? Are the active duty units going to open their arms rooms and take to the streets? Unless things have drastically changed, my unit arms rooms never had more than 1 case of ammo for shtf situations. Divide that over 100+ soldiers. What are they going to do? Yell bang bang? You think the ammo depots won't be emptied out prior to a UN invasion?