Showing posts with label a vision for the United States. Show all posts
Showing posts with label a vision for the United States. Show all posts

February 10, 2011

Proposed New Constitution for the United States

Proposed change to the US Constitution

The President is a clerk, not a King or Emperor. 

We the People
 
I. Powers and Rights Reserved To We the People, Never Delegated or Violated Without Consent
A. The People are expressly defined as human beings and does not refer to corporations or contractual relationships.
B. No contract, agreement, or promise may ever bind any human to refuse to enforce the law, or prohibit them from speaking on matters of public interest.
C. We the People may believe anything, including the possible belief that this Constitution must be discarded and replaced with a superior document which defends the People and protects their power to enforce this Constitution against the Government.
D. The People are educated to apply the lessons of history to ensure rights are preserved, power asserted, and this Constitution is protected from domestic and foreign enemies.
E. The People have the enforceable right and power to review any public document and access any public official.
F. The People have the enforceable right to engage in any speech, communication, or discussion on issues of war crimes, government incompetence, or allegations of reckless government planning and maladministration.
G. Government officials, agencies, departments may not invoke any power or right they have denied to the People.
H. The People have the right to affordable housing. Where none is available, the government is denied the power to prosecute anyone for not living in a home, or residing in a public park, open forest, or public lands.
I. The People have the enforceable right to freely travel, without questions, and without delay. Any law enforcement officer, agents, or contacted security official who uses any ruse, scheme, or deception to engage in pretextual stops shall be enforced as a violation of this Constitution.
J. The People have the enforceable right to compel government officials, contractors, and securtit personnel to identify themselves, disclose their policies and procedures, and respond to complaints about violations of this Constitution, the Supreme Law, or laws of war.
K. The People may not be subject to any electronic surveillance except on probable cause and a warrant before a judicial tribunal. The President, Congress and others are expressly denied the power to enact, create, use, or rely on quasi-judicial tribunals to self-certify warrants to conduct surveillance.
L. All denied powers to the US Government in this Constitution are reserved to the People to be used to defend the Constitution.

II. Powers and Rights Reserved to States
A. States shall have authority to enforce any law within their jurisdiction. Failure to enforce the laws of war shall be prosecuted as a war crime.
B. States shall, when the Federal Government refuses to enforce the Constitution or Supreme Law, enforce the national and international law against contractors, legal counsel, state or US government officials.
C. Any state may start impeachment investigations or proceedings against the President, Member of Congress, or US government official on issues of international laws of war, domestic rebellion, or violations of the Supreme Law oath of office, or Geneva Conventions. The States shall, upon receipt of an impeachment investigation or conviction from any other state, shall within 10 days debate that resolution. If convicted by 2/3 of the States, that US government official shall be removed from office. Any effort to thwart State efforts to enforce the US Constitution through impeachment investigations or impeachment proceedings at the State level may be construed as a subsequent violation of this Constitution and laws of war.
D. The States may, without notice, organize themselves to collectively defend this Constitution from the domestic enemies in the United States government. The States Governors have the standing power, right, and authority to use deadly combat force to enforce this Constitution against US government officials.
E. A failure of any State official to enforce the laws of war shall be subject to a war crimes trial within 90 days of discovering that evidence. Where there are credible allegations of war crimes, a failure to investigate shall be construed as a subsequent war crime, punishable by the death penalty.
F. States have the power to enforce contract obligations between contractors and the US government which affect the rights of their State citizens. Failure to enforce these contractual obligations against the contractors or US government could be construed as a subsequent violation under the laws of war and US Constitution against legal counsel, state officials, or court officers.

III. Independent Branch
A. All US government, contractor-provided, and legal counsel data shall be retained in an independent branch.
B. The President, Congress, and Judicial branches have no power, right or claim to not fully fund this Independent Branch.
C. The Independent Branch conducts electronic surveillance of the US government, stores that data, and ensures there are independent, safe, retained records of all US government transaction, including conversations and memos between legal counsel and government officials. Once created for the government or connected with any legal or illegal activity, these records are public records.
D. The data may be seen only upon a showing of reasonable belief or suspicion by the United States Congress, Court, or Executive Branch that the information may be useful in enforcing the Constitution, Supreme Law, or Geneva Conventions.
E. Private citizens may view any data, unless the US government provides sufficient, detailed evidence why that request for information should not be met for bonafide, lawful secrets. Any effort to hide evidence behind a claim of "state secrets," where that claim is linked with an effort to bypass the Constitution, oath of office, Supreme Law, or laws of war may be punishable by the death penalty.
F. All government data belongs to the People. Any legal counsel working for the US government shall ensure that the People's right to reliable information is protected. A failure to protect this information could be construed as a war crime.

IV. Prosecutorial Branch
A. All prosecutorial options are denied of the President.
B. The Prosecutorial branch has the power to raise independent combat power, support them, and may lawfully use that deadly combat force to confront Members of Congress, the Judicial Branch Officers, or the Presidents upon showing of probable cause for war crimes.
C. The prosecutorial power is the exclusive power of the prosecution branch. However, anyone may make a claim of illegal activity, and enforce the laws of the United States and States respectively. Any effort to block anyone from unilaterally attempting to enforce the laws of war through discovery, investigation, and open discussion of those alleged war crimes shall be construed as a possible subsequent offense under the laws of war.
D. Legal counsel are subject to public review, audit, and can be required, with fair notice, of a requirement to demonstrate before any court their compliance with the laws of war.
E. Legal counsel may be denied authority to conduct discovery during any investigation when that discovery is linked with efforts that would thwart war crimes investigation, enforcement of the Supreme law or Geneva Conventions.

V. Judicial Branch
A. The Judicial Branch is above the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch only in order of precedence. The Judicial Branch is a co-equal branch, and closest to the People and Constitution. It is least responsive, and most slow to the People's daily interests to enforce the Constitution and Supreme Law or Geneva Conventions.
B. Where the Judicial Branch does not timely enforce the Constitution, Supreme Law, or laws of war, the States and People retain the power and right to investigate and prosecute allegations of US government illegal activity, war crimes, or violations of the Supreme law.
C. All precedents under the laws of war are binding on the Judicial Branch, US government, and the People through enforcement actions.
D. Any decision by any judicial officer not to fully enforce the laws of war, Supreme Law, or this Constitution may be construed as a war crime, subject to the death penalty.

VI. Legislative Branch
A. The Legislative Branch is listed after the Judicial Branch because it is less responsive to the People.
B. The Members of Congress may be stopped between sessions and held to account for their failure to enforce the laws of war.
C. Refusing to investigate or impeach the President, Judicial Officers, or any current or former US government official for alleged war crimes, maladministration, illegal warfare, or other crimes against the People, States, or US Government shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to not fully assert ones oath of office, and punishable by the death penalty under the laws of war.
D. There are three chambers to the Congress. The Senate and House have a legal duty to fully enforce the laws. Any decision to not timely review evidence of impeachable offenses, or not investigate war crimes or maladministration could be construed as subsequent offenses under the laws of war.
E. The Superior Chamber shall decide, before any debate, whether the proposed bill is or is not Constitutional. This determination is subject to approval, challenge, and rejection by the People, States, and Judicial Branch.
F. The Congress is denied the exclusive power to make rules. Any rule which prohibits any investigation into alleged malfeasance in re the laws of war, Supreme Law, or oath of office is illegal, and may be construed as a subsequent offense under the laws of war.
G. The Congress shall comply with public audits, and timely provide within 45 days of an audit report a statement of remedy, and outline a plan within 90 days to fully comply with all legal obligations under the Statute, Supreme Law, oath of office, and laws of war.
H. The Congress may raise and support an army, and independently order that army only against the President when the President refuses to enforce the laws of war, or comply with his legal obligations under this Constitution.

VII. Executive Branch
A. The Executive Branch is led by three Presidents, co-equal with non-overlapping jurisdictions. The Executive Branch has one power: Executive Power. All actions taken under that one power are lesser authorities not powers. The Executive Branch has no power to create new powers or assign itself broader power.
B. The Executive Branch is listed last because it is the least responsive to the People, and the greatest threat of tyranny to this Constitution. The President is a clerk, not a King or Emperor. The President only manages programs. The President has no power to ignore, rewrite, or refuse to enforce the law. Each of the three Presidents shall have an ongoing requirement to demonstrate to the People and States and Congress and Courts compliance with the Constitution, Supreme Law, oath of office, and laws of war.
C. The Domestic Affairs President is responsive to the States and US Government on internal affairs.
D. The Foreign Affairs President shall have exclusive power to interact with foreign powers. The Foreign Affairs President is denied any power to violate the laws of war, or use covert activity against American citizens.
E. The Executive Branch, Congress, Judiciary, and Foreign Affairs President are denied the power to thwart any lawful State action to organize with foreign powers and agents to defend the US Constitution, enforce the laws of war, or protect the rights and powers of the People and States against domestic encroachments by the US government, legal counsel, or other US government officials.
F. The Commander in Chief shall only have power to lead combat operations during war time. Congress shall conduct ongoing, public reviews whether the Commander in Chief is or is not competent in managing combat operations. The Presidents and Commander in Chief are denied the power to prohibit Congress from using electronic surveillance or use separately raised and supported armies to conduct this oversight during wartime and peacetime.
G. The Executive Branch is denied the power to block anyone from getting access to illegal activity related to the laws of war.
H. During Peacetime, the Commander in Chief shall periodically cooperate with ongoing Oversight of US combat forces to ensure they are combat ready, fully trained on the laws of war, and prepared to lawfully be used to defend the Constitution against foreign and domestic enemies.
I. The Executive Branch and Presidents and officers, agents, contractors, and personnel are denied the power, right, or authority to order anyone to ignore any statute, law, legal requirement, or obligation under the Constitution.
J. The Executive Branch has no power or authority to directly contact the Legislative Branch by name. The President may only request, not order other branches of government. All Communications between the Executive and Legislative Branch shall pass through the Prosecutorial Branch, and retained in the National Archives. Those records are available for public inspection at any time. The People have the enforceable right to compel the Executive Branch, Legislature, and Judicial Branch to produce documents.
K. The Executive Branch, Congress, Judicial Branch, and Prosecutorial Branch, and States are denied the power to wage warfare, information warfare, or harass American civilians through his agents, combat troops, or third parties in the United states or from overseas. Any funds used for this illegal purpose belong to the People and States. Contracts used to enforce, compel, or organize this illegal activity are not enforceable, and contrary to public policy.
L. The Presidents are denied a presumption of competence until proven. The President shall always have the burden of proof, and is expressly denied a presumption of good faith until demonstrated with overwhelming evidence in public. An election result is not proof of competence nor does it satisfy a presumption of good faith, only of mastery to win an election through legal or illegal methods and deception.
M. The Executive Branch and Presidents and subordinate agency head, contractor, and employees are expressly denied any assurance any conversation he has related to illegal activity, war crimes, unlawful acts, or other threats to the US Constitution shall remain secret behind any shield, scheme, agreement, or technology. Any order a President or anyone gives to anyone to hide, destroy,not provide, or conceal evidence of illegal activity may be construed as a subsequent war crime, punishable by the death penalty. This restriction against following illegal orders may not be bypassed by claiming the order was from a non-person, electronic device, or other non-Constitutionally recognized entity, database, policy, guide, or other document.
N. The Presidents are denied the power to use any combat force, technology, or other military weapon or plan against American civilians, except in cases of internal rebellion which only the Congress shall approve in writing. When the Congress fails to act, or abuses its authority, the State Governors may lawfully use deadly combat force to detain and enforce the laws of war prohibiting illegal use of force against American civilians.
O. The Presidents are denied the power to induce any civilian to take any action that might deny them on any Geneva protections as a civilian. Any order, ruse, scheme, propaganda, or unreliable information to induce anyone to wage war, information warfare, or any action to harass civilians is punishable by the death penalty, and may be enforced as a violation of the laws of war.
P. The President, when delegating any power to any agency head, agrees that that agency shall be organized as if it were a separate, lesser, and not coequal branch. Those agencies shall fully cooperate with the other branches of government to ensure power within the branch or department is divided. There is no single agency, division, or office in the Executive Branch that is beyond ongoing oversight by the other four branches.
Q. The President shall have no power to block the Congress, States, Judiciary, Prosecutorial, and Independent Branch from a having co-equal status to oversee, manage, and organize that lesser branch. If the President refuses to substantially comply with that requirement, Congress may not lawfully provide funding for that agency, and the funds return to the States and People.

August 13, 2008

Former Prime Minister Paul Martin and Haiti and "free trade"

Former Prime Minister Paul Martin and Haiti

(this article first appeared on HaitiAnalysis.com: Link to original article here)

Paul Martin’s History of Haiti and Future Plans for Africa

By: Tracy Glynn - HaitiAnalysis

Rumour spread fast amongst the small activist community in Fredericton months before the official announcement was made that the local chapter of Engineers Without Borders would be hosting a lecture by former Prime Minister Paul Martin on March 23, 2008 at the University of New Brunswick. As Finance Minister, Martin slashed social spending so that more could be given to corporate welfare. Post-secondary education was gutted to the tune of $7 billion from 1993 to 2000, forcing many students into debt before they turned twenty. Plagued by scandals during his reign as Prime Minister, a Ipsos-Reid poll conducted in 2004 found that 61 per cent of Canadians thought his governing Liberal Party was corrupt. After losing the election to Harper, Martin now finds himself speaking at university campuses as an authority on “how business and government can help Africa.”

The corporate media that covered Martin’s lecture failed to mentioned the presence of over a dozen protesters who gathered to counter the onslaught of misinformation and Liberal rhetoric. Flyers were distributed to the crowd on Paul Martin’s track record as Prime Minister including his role in overthrowing the democratically-elected government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti.

When Paul Martin began his speech, two UNB students stood up alongside Martin and unfurled a banner that read

“Canada Out of Haiti and Afghanistan”.

A few minutes later, another couple of students unfurled another banner that read

“Neo-Liberalism=Neo-Colonialism”

on the other side of Martin. The two pairs of students with their message stood by Martin during his entire lecture. Martin, like any good Liberal willing to “listen”, was quoted in the local newspaper as saying that he would expect a protest at a university.

Sadly, many of Martin’s remarks received little challenge from what one would expect would be a critical audience on a university campus. Except for the occasional interruption, Martin was able to make several outrageous statements in an apparent attempt to rewrite a history that only transpired in the past decade. The first interruption came when Martin was responding to a question about the Responsibility to Protect doctrine and he said that he could not think of any Canadian business interests in Haiti. A student asked

“What about the sweatshops?”

Surely Martin must know of the presence of Montreal-based Gildan Active Wear in the country’s capital, Port-au-Prince. Gildan has recently closed their remaining North American shops to expand in countries where labour and production is cheaper like in Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

How was Gildan connected to the overthrowing of Haiti’s democratically-elected and popular leader? Gildan was the primary subcontractor for Alpha Industries, which was owned by Andy Apaid. Apaid was also the head of Group 184, which was the main opposition force to Aristide’s Lavalas party. Aristide, while enjoying popular support especially amongst the country’s poor, was overthrown from power with the help of Canada, the U.S. and France in 2004. About a year before being removed from power, Aristide increased minimum wage from 36 to 70 gourdes in February 2003, a move most likely opposed by the sweatshop kings.

Martin could also not have possibly forgotten about the presence in Haiti of what is now the world’s largest engineering firm, SNC-Lavalin, also from Montreal. SNC-Lavalin after all built the Canadian Embassy in Haiti’s capital. As one of the largest recipients of Canadian aid dollars, SNC-Lavalin works on CIDA-funded projects around the world, from Haiti to Afghanistan. Martin himself has gone the distance for this company, lobbying on behalf of SNC-Lavalin in arms deals in Libya. St. Genevieve Resources is another Canadian company in Haiti with mineral interests. Yves Engler, co-author of Canada in Haiti: Waging War on the Poor Majority, summarizes the close ties between Canadian aid abetting Canadian imperialism:

“the Canadian government may call it foreign aid, but a central aim of the Canadian International Development Agency has always been to help Canadian companies expand abroad both directly and indirectly. The mining sector, for instance, is one of Canadian aid’s greatest success stories and today, Canadian companies hold some 7000 mining concessions around the world… By having a direct hand in liberalizing mining codes in Colombia, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Guinea etc., the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) has helped the flow of mining profits into Canada. In addition, Canada has channelled billions of “aid” dollars through IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programs that have liberalized mining laws around the world.”

Canada has also funded and had incredible say over Haiti’s troubled judicial and prison systems, police force and elections, but as Engler points out:

“Helping keep the world safe for ever-greater exploitation by the world’s corporate oligarchy has been Canadian aid’s biggest success.”

When interrupted during his version of how Aristide was ousted, Martin said that Aristide had asked for help to be removed safely. It was pointed out that Martin’s government had actually orchestrated the second coup of the democratically-elected Aristide with the support of the Canadian military that secured the airport for his removal. Aristide maintains that he was kidnapped by U.S. forces and forced into exile. Martin conveniently left out an important part of history involving his government hosting a meeting in Ottawa with the Presidents of the U.S. and France in January 2003. The meeting, dubbed the Ottawa Initiative, planned the removal of Aristide.

Canada also contributed to the U.S.-supported destabilization campaign aimed at removing Aristide by cutting off aid to Haiti that was highly dependent on foreign aid. CIDA also funded Haitian and Quebec NGOs that were actively organizing against Aristide.

CIDA also financed and militarized the Haitian police force that arrested the former Haitian Prime Minister, Yvon Neptune, on orders from a Justice Ministry where a CIDA employee, Philip Vixamar, was second in command. The former Haitian Prime Minister remained in jail for over two years under a CIDA-backed court system stacked by the coup government.

Martin ended the discussion on Haiti by saying that the neighbouring Caribbean countries supported the removal of Aristide. Actually, the 15-nation Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has called for an independent U.N.-led investigation into the details surrounding Aristide’s removal from power.

Perhaps one of the greatest ironies of the evening came with Martin’s comment that Canada does not have a colonial past after talking about a way forward for First Nations. Didn’t European settlers colonize the land known today as Canada? Besides a certain colonial past, Canada is currently colonizing lands and resources all over the world via its companies, banks, free trade agreements and publicly funded export credit agencies and pension plans. Royal Bank of Canada recently acquired the largest bank in Trinidad, RBTT while the Bank of Nova Scotia has had a foothold in the Caribbean region for over a century, establishing a branch in Jamaica in 1889. Canada has been extracting the riches of countries in this region ever since at the expense of the environment and traditional livelihoods of the colonized.

Martin also said that poverty drives environmental degradation. Martin seems to be getting greed mixed up with poverty. Martin made reference to the growing deforestation in the Congo basin. He blamed poverty and the looting of the forest by locals for fuel. He failed to mention that Canadian mining companies are deforesting large tracts of land for minerals and profit in the country.

The foreign theft of resources from the Congo rainforest is well documented. But Martin’s twisting of the facts of what is happening today in the Congo allows Canadian mining companies to get richer from Congo’s mineral wealth. About ten Canadian mining companies are active in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) today.

In 2002, eight Canadian companies were implicated in the U.N. Report on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth in the Congo. The report recommended investigations by the Canadian government into their actions but no such action was taken. More recently, Anvil Mining, a Canadian-Australian company, is accused of helping soldiers end an uprising in a village near an Anvil mine that killed more than 80 people including villagers.

According to Le Monde Diplomatique, Canadian mining companies Barrick and Banro had been “funding military operations [in the DRC] in exchange for lucrative contracts.” Barrick and Banro are today trying to silence allegations of abuse in Africa, in the case of Barrick, an alleged massacre of small-scale miners in Tanzania. Écosociété, a Quebec-based publisher, has recently been served with two libel lawsuits, a $5 million SLAPP suit by Banro and a $6 million SLAPP suit by Barrick following the publication of the book Noir Canada.

Over the years advisors and directors for Barrick have included George H.W. Bush, Brian Mulroney, as well as American and Canadian Senators and elite. Connections between Canadian politicians and companies exploiting resources around the globe abound and certainly are not limited to Paul Martin. Joe Clark was both the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party while acting as a special advisor on Africa for the mining company First Quantum Mineral in the mid 1990s.

As more and more Canadians were becoming aware of the extent of abuses faced by communities affected by Canadian mining across the globe, Martin’s government rejected recommendations by an all party Senate Committee to regulate the Canadian extractive sector abroad.

Martin’s prescription for Africa: The Common Market. A common market is essentially a customs union with common policies on product regulation. It is driven by philosophies of the freedom of movement of land, capital and labour for production, and of enterprise. Sounds a lot like “free trade”? Martin never uttered those two words during his entire speech. Maybe he did not want to upset his hosts, the Engineers Without Borders, who were handing out fair trade chocolates during the opening reception.

Martin has just founded an organization devoted to stopping environmental degradation in the Congo Rainforest Basin. One could be forgiven if they made the presumption that this fund has more to do with creating Canadian business friendly havens than helping the poor people of Africa.


ShareThis