Home

USC Title 8……who is charged with defending our borders?

6 Comments

Marti Oakley (C)copyright 2010 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

_______________________

“The AG can at any time, and now with the help and cooperation of HSD and Ms. Napolitano, according to this code, send the military to defend our southern border.  So what’s the problem?  Americans getting kidnapped out of their states, murdered on their land and terrorized daily…..and you don’t see any reason to send our military down there to protect these people? “

USC Title 8……who is charged with defending our borders?

As of about five years ago this code actually read “in the event of an influx of illegal aliens”. Well excuse me, you royal jackass’s….we’ve had an “event”. About 20 million of them by most estimates with more “events” occurring each day; do you think maybe you should do something?    

It is the duty and responsibility of these two agencies and officers to defend and secure the borders and coastlines of the United States even against the influx of illegal aliens. Someone isn’t doing their job. Here is an excerpt from USC Title 8 you all might find interesting:

Title 8 Chapter 12: Subchapter 1103

1103. Powers and duties of the Secretary, the Under Secretary, and the Attorney General

 5) He shall have the power and duty to control and guard the boundaries and borders of the United States against the illegal entry of aliens and shall, in his discretion, appoint for that purpose such number of employees of the Service as to him shall appear necessary and proper.

(10) In the event the Attorney General determines that an actual or imminent mass influx of aliens arriving off the coast of the United States, or near a land border, presents urgent circumstances requiring an immediate Federal response, the Attorney General may authorize any State or local law enforcement officer, with the consent of the head of the department, agency, or establishment under whose jurisdiction the individual is serving, to perform or exercise any of the powers, privileges, or duties conferred or imposed by this chapter or regulations issued there under upon officers or employees of the Service.

We have suffered successive United States Attorney’s General who failed to perform the duties of their office as prescribed in US Code & Title 8.  Although the language has changed significantly, especially during the Bush/Cheney cabal, the US Attorney General is still charged with defending our borders.  These may be either coastal or land boundaries. More

Trans-Pacific Partnership: Another NAFTA or Obama’s New Trade Model?

Leave a comment

Action Alert – Will the TPP be more of the same?
Trans-Pacific Partnership: Another NAFTA or Obama’s New Trade Model?

The TPP will be Obama's first trade agreement. Will he choose the disastrous NAFTA model or enact a new American Fair Tradel agenda?
Urge Congress to ensure any Obama trade deal moves away from the disastrous NAFTA model and toward a new American fair trade agenda


Candidate Obama promised to fix NAFTA and craft a new job-creating trade strategy going forward. He promised his trade agreements would put working people, the environment, family farms and consumers first. Now the moment of truth is upon us: the Obama administration has begun negotiations with seven Asian/Pacific countries on what could be its first trade agreement – known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

The usual suspects – Big Pharma, agribusiness giants and chronic offshoring multinationals – are hell-bent on more NAFTAs. And unfortunately, there are some in the administration happy to forget President Obama’s fair trade commitments.

Urge Congress to ensure that any Obama trade deal reflects his promises to ditch the NAFTA model and craft a new American trade agenda that works for us. More

The World Bank in the hot seat

Leave a comment

New from GRAIN | 4 May 2010

 

GRAIN
May 2010

The World Bank is marching ahead with plans to facilitate global land grabs, while refusing to release a report that confirms the negative impacts of these deals for local communities. At its annual land conference last week, where the report was supposed to be launched, the Bank tried to redirect the land grab discussion towards “win-win” solutions. But its strategy failed, given the Bank’s staunch corporate bias and the growing public rejection of its “principles” for socially responsible land grabbing.

Read this new issue of Against the grain in English here:
http://www.grain.org/articles/?id=64. The Spanish and French versions will be online shortly.

The Other Oil Disaster: Cancer and Canada’s Tar Sands

Leave a comment

 DR GINA SOLOMON ON HER MAY 03, 2010 VISIT TO FORT CHIPEWYAN

  • Overall, the report found a 30% increase in cancers in Ft. Chip compared with expected over the last 12 years;
  • Leukemias and lymphomas were increased by 3-fold;
  • Bile duct cancers were increased by 7-fold;
  • Other cancers, such as soft tissue sarcomas, and lung cancers in women, were also elevated.
  • I’m not sure who wrote the press release for the government, but it sure weren’t the scientists who actually did the investigation.” More

Turning African farmland over to big business

1 Comment

 

Read full article here

GRAIN

“MCC African partner countries are open for business”
Ambassador John Danilovich, CEO of the MCC, June 2008

When the European powers invaded Africa they brought with them their systems of private property. Laws were established based on these systems, in order to justify, entrench and facilitate the takeover of lands from local communities. But such laws were hardly ever applied or respected beyond the boundaries of the European farms and plantations. With independence, although the Western laws often stayed on the books, the African states assumed ultimate and often sole ownership of all lands in their territories. But in practice they did not have the power to manage these lands. So the vast majority of land in the African countryside, through the colonial period and up until today, has been governed according to local communities’ customary land practices. 1

These customary practices are often complex and rarely static. They have evolved over time, shifting with local power politics and adapting to new pressures, such as urbanisation, migration, deforestation or the fragmentation of lands. They are based on varied and overlapping rights and responsibilities, and profoundly integrated with local farming, fishing and pastoral practices. In official circles, these systems of land management have been marginalised and condemned for years, but today they are under unprecedented attack.2

Africa has become the new frontier for global food (and agrofuel) production. Billions of dollars are being mobilised to create the infrastructure that will connect more of Africa’s farmland to global markets, and billions more are being mobilised by investors to take over that farmland to produce for those markets. To get a sense of the extent of what is transpiring, one need only look at the massive oil-palm plantation planned for Liberia by the world’s largest palm-oil companies, or the joint Japanese–Brazilian project to transform vast areas of Mozambique into Brazilian-style soya plantations.3 There is no place for Africa’s millions of small farmers in this new vision. And, like the colonial powers that came before, the new wave of invaders needs a legal and administrative structure to justify and facilitate the takeover of these lands. More

Confronting the FAO to stop GMOs

Leave a comment

By GRAIN

Between 28 February and 3 March  2010, the Network for the Defence of Maize, the National Assembly of Environmentally Affected People and Vía Campesina–North America held an independent public hearing in Guadalajara, Mexico. The objective was to bring together the evidence and to elaborate the arguments for starting proceedings in international courts of justice against the Mexican government for deliberately permitting the introduction into the country of genetically modified maize. Mexico is where maize originated, thousands of years ago, and where today more than 1,500 native varieties grow, evolve, and are bred. The cultivation of these varieties is governed by a complex interaction of not only social relations, profound knowledge and trust, but also community resistance.

Ten years ago, Mexico’s government began to distribute large quantities of GM maize seeds in the countryside, in an illegal, undercover operation, and native maize in different regions began to be contaminated. In response, indigenous and peasant communities from many regions formed the Network for the Defence of Maize (Red en Defensa del Maíz). They exchanged local knowledge and experience, and decided to ban the introduction of GM maize in their regions. The network was a space where they could share views, and they became more convinced than ever that the best way of protecting maize was by growing it.

For these communities, agriculture is not a commercial activity but a way of caring for the planet through continuous work. Growing their own food is not only a way of understanding the complex relations between winds, water, forests, other crops, animals and soils but also of protecting human life and promoting justice. Only then can communities be sure that the diversity of maize will not be lost and that the natural and social fabric of relations that lie behind maize will not be weakened.

The decision to hold a first public hearing to make an international case against the Mexican government and the major corporations involved in GM agriculture and food stemmed from the perception that the Mexican judicial system is completely closed or corrupt, or both. Over the last decade the Mexican government has approved a set of reforms and laws to privatise, register, certify or ban what were once commons – water, forests, seeds, biodiversity. It has encouraged intellectual property rights through patents and other legal devices and supported the introduction of GM crops. These laws have created a huge new space for the big corporations to manoeuvre at large but restricted yet further the already limited legal space available to common people. The three most damaging measures have been: the land counter-reform that permits the privatisation of public or communal land; the approval of NAFTA, which provides the big corporations with a totally different set of rules with which to advance their interests; and the refusal to acknowledge indigenous rights in the Constitution. More

OBAMA FINDS LEGAL WAY AROUND THE 2ND AMENDMENT

Leave a comment

Submitted by: J.S. Rugg

While you were watching the oil spill, H. Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the UN.  This is one of the things Sheriff Mack has been telling people about.

“What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that permits firearms and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public.

We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

_______________________________________ 

Read the Article:   More

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: