On martyrdom

نايلة تويني

نايلة تويني

Martyr   الشهيد

On martyrdom in Lebanon

al-arabiya-logo

What allows the Lebanese to continue living in a country whose history, and perhaps future, is contaminated with blood is the will of life which is stronger than all circumstances. Nations establish peace for a better future for themselves and their sons while we drown in a sea of blood for the sake of causes which many don’t know the results and aims of. All nations sacrificed blood to reach their aims. Successes and victories cannot be achieved without sacrifices. If successes are not achieved, the blood which was shed is cheapened. This is what we do not want for Lebanon’s martyrs who fell at more than one place at many different times. All parties in Lebanon gave martyrs for the country’s sake. Some of them gave martyrs for the sake of other countries. But in all cases, they believed in a cause, defended it and sacrificed what is precious for its sake. Perhaps most Lebanese reached the conclusion that dialogue is the best for reaching goals and that martyrs – all martyrs – are a loss to Lebanon. The long war that lasted for 15 years shed a lot of blood, and it didn’t end until a political agreement, sponsored by certain countries and agreed upon by other countries, was reached.

But martyrdom itself is a cause that must be restudied; the basis and conditions of which must be specified considering some youths are being deceived. They are being deceived into believing in causes which are not actually patriotic, religious or humane but which actually serve certain parties’ personal aims.

Religious and social scholars must contribute to clarifying the concepts and conditions of martyrdom

Nayla Tueni

Therefore, religious and social scholars must contribute to clarifying the concepts and conditions of martyrdom instead of settling at condemnations that change nothing.

Martyrdom is a noble act as it signifies a cause in which the martyr sacrifices himself for the sake of his country’s independence and for the sake of protecting it and defending it and its people. But he who destroys his country, blows up its institutions, kills it citizens, destroys his family, gives up his humanity and threatens his society is certainly not a martyr. This is what religious figures must say. So, will they dare?

This article was first published in al-Nahar on Feb. 3, 2014.

_____________________

Nayla Tueni is one of the few elected female politicians in Lebanon and of the two youngest. She became a member of parliament in 2009 and following the assassination of her father, Gebran, she is currently a member of the board and Deputy General Manager of Lebanon’s leading daily, Annahar. Prior to her political career, Nayla had trained, written in and managed various sections of Annahar, where she currently has a regular column. She can be followed on Twitter @NaylaTueni
نايلة تويني

نايلة تويني

Martyr   الشهيد

annahar

 

2014

إنها ارادة الحياة الاقوى من كل الظروف التي تسمح للبنانيين باستمرار العيش في بلد تاريخه، وربما مستقبله، ملوث بالدماء. الامم تبني سلاما من أجل مستقبل أفضل لها ولأبنائها من بعدها، فيما نحن لا نزال نغرق في بحر من الدماء من أجل قضايا لا يعرف كثيرون نتائجها واهدافها. كل الامم بذلت دماء غالية من أجل بلوغ أهدافها الخاصة الواضحة المعالم، فالنجاحات والانتصارات لا تتحقق من دون تضحيات، أما اذا لم تتحقق النجاحات، فتصير الدماء التي اهرقت رخيصة. وهذا ما لا نريده لشهداء لبنان الذين سقطوا في اكثر من مكان وزمان. فكل الاطراف في لبنان قدموا شهداء من أجل الوطن، وبعضهم من أجل وطن آخر، لكنهم في كل حال آمنوا بقضية ما ودافعوا عنها وبذلوا الغالي من اجلها. وربما وصل معظم اللبنانيين الى استنتاج مفاده ان الحوار هو الافضل لبلوغ الاهداف، وان الشهداء، كل الشهداء، هم خسارة للبنان، بما لدى كل منهم من طاقة كان يمكن ان تفيد لبنانه في المجالات المختلفة. فالحرب الطويلة التي استمرت 15 سنة، قبل ان تسكت المدافع، اراقت دماء غزيرة، ولم توقف الا باتفاق سياسي رعته دول واتفقت عليه دول أخرى.

لكن الشهادة في ذاتها قضية يجب ان يعاد درسها وتحديد اسسها وشروطها، اذ ان عدداً من الشبان يغرر بهم لقضايا ليست في حقيقتها وطنية ولا دينية ولا انسانية، بل تخدم مآرب اصحابها وأنانياتهم وحساباتهم الشخصية، وربما ارتباطاتهم الاستخبارية. من هنا، على العلماء في الدين والمجتمع ان يساهموا في توضيح مفاهيم الشهادة واسسها وشروطها، عوض الاكتفاء باستنكارات لا تقدم ولا تؤخر.
الشهادة عمل نبيل في ذاته، اذ يحمل قضية يتحول معها الشهيد قربانا يقدم على مذبح الوطن، من اجل استقلاله، ومن أجل صونه، والدفاع عنه، وعن أهله. اما ان يدمر الواحد بلده، ويفجّر مؤسساته، ويقتل مواطنيه، ويدمر عائلته، ويفرّط في انسانيته، ويهدد كيان مجتمعه، فلن يكون هذا بالتأكيد شهيداً. وهذا ما يجب ان يقوله رجال الدين. فهل يتجرأون؟

The Govt. of the United State Has A Moral Responsibility To Help Bashar Assad Eliminate the Islamists

Islamists drive out US-backed Syrian rebel general Salim Idris

White House Fact Sheet On Iran Nuclear Deal

[Have we all misjudged the situation?  Is Obama actually a real Peacemaker, disguised as a war criminal?  By partnering with Putin to double-cross both Israel and the Saudis, Obama has largely disarmed the world’s two greatest troublemakers and state terrorists of their ability to extort concessions from us any longer.

Before this disappointment in Tel Aviv and Riyadh, there was the heartbreak felt from missing-out on a suicidal world war which they had worked so hard to force Obama into.  The chemical weapons agreement which enabled us to avert world war will do so much more than just deal with Middle Eastern WMD; it is a joint commitment by the world’s two greatest powers to work together to defuse the deadly world crisis which has been released by Bush’s terror war.  This new agreement with Iran, IF it can be made PERMANENT, will create a worldwide ban on new nuclear proliferation outside of the new global protocols that are now being created.  This will effectively limit ALL nuclear development to peaceful uses ONLY.  Between the chemical agreement and the Iranian nuclear agreement, real “weapons of mass destruction” (NOT the insipid American definition of WMD, which can be anything from an IED to a large “MENTOS” bomb) will systematically be eliminated from the Middle East, as a first step for worldwide disarmament of weapons of mass destruction.

Israel is so adamantly opposed to any controls on WMD, even to those possessed by their avowed enemy, Iran, or even treaties with them, simply because the Zionist leaders NEED their “special weapons.”   They have used them so effectively, up until now, to extort concessions from Western leaders, that they have truly given Israel control over all US foreign policy.  Fear that Israeli leaders have all been insane enough to ignite a world war in the Middle East, has made American leaders to act like the “rational” partners, forcing them to take actions that they might not have taken, in order to try to contain explosive Zionist leaders.

The Saudis, for their part, used their massive oil resources like a non-lethal “weapon of mass destruction,” since it also gave Riyadh its own veto power over US foreign policy.  The ongoing oil and gas booms in America have largely neutralized this Saudi power to wield political terrorism over American heads.  If Obama’s joint peace efforts with Putin hold together, until they can be forged into hard laws, then the world military crisis will have been defused, the two greatest sources of world terrorism will have been disarmed, and astronomical amounts of investment dollars and rubles will have been made available towards ending the world financial crisis and forging a new economic order.

So many great things could be done by Peacemakers, especially in a world which is as hungry for Peace as it is for food.]

Read the White House fact sheet on Iran nuclear deal

 

nbc-logo

 

The exact details remain unclear, but NBC’s Ann Curry says this initial first step in the deal is historic, but may set off backlash for some in Iran.

 

Below is a fact sheet released by the White House late Saturday describing the key elements of the agreement with Iran on its nuclear program:

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

November 23, 2013

Fact Sheet:  First Step Understandings Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program

The P5+1 (the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia, and China, facilitated by the European Union) has been engaged in serious and substantive negotiations with Iran with the goal of reaching a verifiable diplomatic resolution that would prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

President Obama has been clear that achieving a peaceful resolution that prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is in America’s national security interest.  Today, the P5+1 and Iran reached a set of initial understandings that halts the progress of Iran’s nuclear program and rolls it back in key respects.  These are the first meaningful limits that Iran has accepted on its nuclear program in close to a decade.  The initial, six month step includes significant limits on Iran’s nuclear program and begins to address our most urgent concerns including Iran’s enrichment capabilities; its existing stockpiles of enriched uranium; the number and capabilities of its centrifuges; and its ability to produce weapons-grade plutonium using the Arak reactor.  The concessions Iran has committed to make as part of this first step will also provide us with increased transparency and intrusive monitoring of its nuclear program.  In the past, the concern has been expressed that Iran will use negotiations to buy time to advance their program.  Taken together, these first step measures will help prevent Iran from using the cover of negotiations to continue advancing its nuclear program as we seek to negotiate a long-term, comprehensive solution that addresses all of the international community’s concerns.

Secretary of State John Kerry lays out some of the terms of the nuclear deal with Iran.

In return, as part of this initial step, the P5+1 will provide limited, temporary, targeted, and reversible relief to Iran.  This relief is structured so that the overwhelming majority of the sanctions regime, including the key oil, banking, and financial sanctions architecture, remains in place.  The P5+1 will continue to enforce these sanctions vigorously.  If Iran fails to meet its commitments, we will revoke the limited relief and impose additional sanctions on Iran.

The P5+1 and Iran also discussed the general parameters of a comprehensive solution that would constrain Iran’s nuclear program over the long term, provide verifiable assurances to the international community that Iran’s nuclear activities will be exclusively peaceful, and ensure that any attempt by Iran to pursue a nuclear weapon would be promptly detected.  The set of understandings also includes an acknowledgment by Iran that it must address all United Nations Security Council resolutions – which Iran has long claimed are illegal – as well as past and present issues with Iran’s nuclear program that have been identified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).  This would include resolution of questions concerning the possible military dimension of Iran’s nuclear program, including Iran’s activities at Parchin.  As part of a comprehensive solution, Iran must also come into full compliance with its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its obligations to the IAEA.  With respect to the comprehensive solution, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.  Put simply, this first step expires in six months, and does not represent an acceptable end state to the United States or our P5+1 partners.

Halting the Progress of Iran’s Program and Rolling Back Key Elements

Iran has committed to halt enrichment above 5%:

· Halt all enrichment above 5% and dismantle the technical connections required to enrich above 5%.

Iran has committed to neutralize its stockpile of near-20% uranium:

· Dilute below 5% or convert to a form not suitable for further enrichment its entire stockpile of near-20% enriched uranium before the end of the initial phase.

President Obama says the historic nuclear deal with Iran is a first step.  He added, the U.S. will continue to implement tough sanctions, but won’t impose new ones if Iran meets its commitments during the next six months.

Iran has committed to halt progress on its enrichment capacity:

· Not install additional centrifuges of any type.

· Not install or use any next-generation centrifuges to enrich uranium.

· Leave inoperable roughly half of installed centrifuges at Natanz and three-quarters of installed centrifuges at Fordow, so they cannot be used to enrich uranium.

· Limit its centrifuge production to those needed to replace damaged machines, so Iran cannot use the six months to stockpile centrifuges.

· Not construct additional enrichment facilities.

Iran has committed to halt progress on the growth of its 3.5% stockpile:

· Not increase its stockpile of 3.5% low enriched uranium, so that the amount is not greater at the end of the six months than it is at the beginning, and any newly enriched 3.5% enriched uranium is converted into oxide.

Iran has committed to no further advances of its activities at Arak and to halt progress on its plutonium track.  Iran has committed to:

· Not commission the Arak reactor.

· Not fuel the Arak reactor.

· Halt the production of fuel for the Arak reactor.

· No additional testing of fuel for the Arak reactor.

· Not install any additional reactor components at Arak.

· Not transfer fuel and heavy water to the reactor site.

· Not construct a facility capable of reprocessing.  Without reprocessing, Iran cannot separate plutonium from spent fuel.

Unprecedented transparency and intrusive monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program 

Iran has committed to:

· Provide daily access by IAEA inspectors at Natanz and Fordow.  This daily access will permit inspectors to review surveillance camera footage to ensure comprehensive monitoring.  This access will provide even greater transparency into enrichment at these sites and shorten detection time for any non-compliance.

· Provide IAEA access to centrifuge assembly facilities.

· Provide IAEA access to centrifuge rotor component production and storage facilities.

· Provide IAEA access to uranium mines and mills.

· Provide long-sought design information for the Arak reactor.  This will provide critical insight into the reactor that has not previously been available.

· Provide more frequent inspector access to the Arak reactor.

· Provide certain key data and information called for in the Additional Protocol to Iran’s IAEA Safeguards Agreement and Modified Code 3.1.

Verification Mechanism

The IAEA will be called upon to perform many of these verification steps, consistent with their ongoing inspection role in Iran.  In addition, the P5+1 and Iran have committed to establishing a Joint Commission to work with the IAEA to monitor implementation and address issues that may arise.  The Joint Commission will also work with the IAEA to facilitate resolution of past and present concerns with respect to Iran’s nuclear program, including the possible military dimension of Iran’s nuclear program and Iran’s activities at Parchin.

Limited, Temporary, Reversible Relief

In return for these steps, the P5+1 is to provide limited, temporary, targeted, and reversible relief while maintaining the vast bulk of our sanctions, including the oil, finance, and banking sanctions architecture.  If Iran fails to meet its commitments, we will revoke the relief.  Specifically the P5+1 has committed to:

· Not impose new nuclear-related sanctions for six months, if Iran abides by its commitments under this deal, to the extent permissible within their political systems.

· Suspend certain sanctions on gold and precious metals, Iran’s auto sector, and Iran’s petrochemical exports, potentially providing Iran approximately $1.5 billion in revenue.

· License safety-related repairs and inspections inside Iran for certain Iranian airlines.

· Allow purchases of Iranian oil to remain at their currently significantly reduced levels – levels that are 60% less than two years ago.  $4.2 billion from these sales will be allowed to be transferred in installments if, and as, Iran fulfills its commitments.

· Allow $400 million in governmental tuition assistance to be transferred from restricted Iranian funds directly to recognized educational institutions in third countries to defray the tuition costs of Iranian students.

Humanitarian Transactions

Facilitate humanitarian transactions that are already allowed by U.S. law.  Humanitarian transactions have been explicitly exempted from sanctions by Congress so this channel will not provide Iran access to any new source of funds.  Humanitarian transactions are those related to Iran’s purchase of food, agricultural commodities, medicine, medical devices; we would also facilitate transactions for medical expenses incurred abroad.  We will establish this channel for the benefit of the Iranian people.

Putting Limited Relief in Perspective

In total, the approximately $7 billion in relief is a fraction of the costs that Iran will continue to incur during this first phase under the sanctions that will remain in place.  The vast majority of Iran’s approximately $100 billion in foreign exchange holdings are inaccessible or restricted by sanctions.

In the next six months, Iran’s crude oil sales cannot increase.  Oil sanctions alone will result in approximately $30 billion in lost revenues to Iran – or roughly $5 billion per month – compared to what Iran earned in a six month period in 2011, before these sanctions took effect.  While Iran will be allowed access to $4.2 billion of its oil sales, nearly $15 billion of its revenues during this period will go into restricted overseas accounts.  In summary, we expect the balance of Iran’s money in restricted accounts overseas will actually increase, not decrease, under the terms of this deal.

Maintaining Economic Pressure on Iran and Preserving Our Sanctions Architecture

During the first phase, we will continue to vigorously enforce our sanctions against Iran, including by taking action against those who seek to evade or circumvent our sanctions.

· Sanctions affecting crude oil sales will continue to impose pressure on Iran’s government.  Working with our international partners, we have cut Iran’s oil sales from 2.5 million barrels per day (bpd) in early 2012 to 1 million bpd today, denying Iran the ability to sell almost 1.5 million bpd.  That’s a loss of more than $80 billion since the beginning of 2012 that Iran will never be able to recoup.  Under this first step, the EU crude oil ban will remain in effect and Iran will be held to approximately 1 million bpd in sales, resulting in continuing lost sales worth an additional $4 billion per month, every month, going forward.

· Sanctions affecting petroleum product exports to Iran, which result in billions of dollars of lost revenue, will remain in effect.

· The vast majority of Iran’s approximately $100 billion in foreign exchange holdings remain inaccessible or restricted by our sanctions.

· Other significant parts of our sanctions regime remain intact, including:

· Sanctions against the Central Bank of Iran and approximately two dozen other major Iranian banks and financial actors;

· Secondary sanctions, pursuant to the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (CISADA) as amended and other laws, on banks that do business with U.S.-designated individuals and entities;

· Sanctions on those who provide a broad range of other financial services to Iran, such as many types of insurance; and,

· Restricted access to the U.S. financial system.

· All sanctions on over 600 individuals and entities targeted for supporting Iran’s nuclear or ballistic missile program remain in effect.

· Sanctions on several sectors of Iran’s economy, including shipping and shipbuilding, remain in effect.

· Sanctions on long-term investment in and provision of technical services to Iran’s energy sector remain in effect.

· Sanctions on Iran’s military program remain in effect.

· Broad U.S. restrictions on trade with Iran remain in effect, depriving Iran of access to virtually all dealings with the world’s biggest economy.

· All UN Security Council sanctions remain in effect.

· All of our targeted sanctions related to Iran’s state sponsorship of terrorism, its destabilizing role in the Syrian conflict, and its abysmal human rights record, among other concerns, remain in effect.

A Comprehensive Solution

During the six-month initial phase, the P5+1 will negotiate the contours of a comprehensive solution.  Thus far, the outline of the general parameters of the comprehensive solution envisions concrete steps to give the international community confidence that Iran’s nuclear activities will be exclusively peaceful.  With respect to this comprehensive resolution:  nothing is agreed to with respect to a comprehensive solution until everything is agreed to.  Over the next six months, we will determine whether there is a solution that gives us sufficient confidence that the Iranian program is peaceful.  If Iran cannot address our concerns, we are prepared to increase sanctions and pressure.

Conclusion

In sum, this first step achieves a great deal in its own right.  Without this phased agreement, Iran could start spinning thousands of additional centrifuges.  It could install and spin next-generation centrifuges that will reduce its breakout times.  It could fuel and commission the Arak heavy water reactor.  It could grow its stockpile of 20% enriched uranium to beyond the threshold for a bomb’s worth of uranium. Iran can do none of these things under the conditions of the first step understanding.

Furthermore, without this phased approach, the international sanctions coalition would begin to fray because Iran would make the case to the world that it was serious about a diplomatic solution and we were not.  We would be unable to bring partners along to do the crucial work of enforcing our sanctions.  With this first step, we stop and begin to roll back Iran’s program and give Iran a sharp choice:  fulfill its commitments and negotiate in good faith to a final deal, or the entire international community will respond with even more isolation and pressure.

The American people prefer a peaceful and enduring resolution that prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and strengthens the global non-proliferation regime.  This solution has the potential to achieve that.  Through strong and principled diplomacy, the United States of America will do its part for greater peace, security, and cooperation among nations.

Related stories:

In the Middle East, the prize of peace is now there for the taking

In the Middle East, the prize of peace is now there for the taking

guardian

As with Kennedy and Khrushchev or Nixon and the Chinese, resolution of conflict only comes when we reach out to our enemies and negotiate.

 

 

Richard Nixon with Zhou Enlai and Chang Chun-chiao

US president Richard Nixon with China’s premier Chou Enlai, left, and Shanghai Communist party leader Chang Chun-chiao during his 1972 visit. Photograph: Bettmann/Corbis

 

In February 1972, US president Richard Nixon made a “surprise” visit to China, recognising Mao Zedong’s communist regime and opening the door to the more or less peaceful relations that have prevailed ever since between the two countries. Although Nixon had built his political career on the anticommunist campaigns that were in part a reaction to the “loss of China” in 1949, he was then following in the footsteps of General Charles de Gaulle, who had established diplomatic relations with China eight years earlier, in 1964, because, as De Gaulle said, one must “recognise the world as it is”, and “before being communist, China is China”.

In 1973 Nixon and Henry Kissinger signed the Paris accords that put an official end to the US war in Vietnam. A decade before that, John F Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev resolved the Cuban missile crisis by, on the Soviet side, withdrawing missiles from Cuba, and, on the US side, by promising not to attack Cuba and withdrawing missiles from Turkey.

These events changed the course of history away from endless confrontation and the risk of global war. It must be remembered that neither China nor the Soviet Union nor North Vietnam met western standards of democracy, less so in fact than present-day Iran. De Gaulle, Kennedy, Nixon and Kissinger were no friends of communism and, on the other side, neither Khrushchev, Mao nor the Vietnamese had any use for capitalism and western imperialism.

Peace is not something to be made between friends but between adversaries. It is based on a recognition of reality. When countries or ideologies are in conflict, there are only two issues: total destruction of one side, as with Rome and Carthage, or peace and negotiations. As history shows, in the case of the Soviet Union, China and Vietnam, peace was a precondition that made the internal evolution of those countries possible.

During recent decades, when it comes to the Middle East, the west has forgotten the very notion of diplomacy. Instead, it has followed the line of “total destruction of the enemy”, whether Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, the Assad regime in Syria or the Islamic Republic of Iran. That line has been based on ideology: a mixture of human rights fundamentalism and blind support for the “only democracy in the region”, Israel. However, it has led to a total failure: this policy has brought no benefit whatsoever to the west and has only caused immense suffering to the populations that it claimed to be helping.

There are signs that the situation is changing. First, the British and then the American people and their representatives rejected a new war in Syria. Russia, the US and Syria reached an agreement over Syria’s chemical weapons. US president Barack Obama is making moves towards honest negotiations with Iran, and the EU’s foreign policy chief and Iran’s foreign minister judged talks just concluded in Geneva as “substantive and forward-looking”.

All these developments should be pursued with the utmost energy. The planned second Geneva conference on Syria must include all internal and external parties to the conflict if it is to constitute an important step towards finding a solution to the tragedy of that war-torn country. The unjust sanctions against Iran, as in the earlier case of Iraq, are severely punishing the population and must be lifted as soon as possible.

Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his supporters are staunchly opposed to these moves towards peace. But they must realise that we might start asking questions about the biggest elephant in the room: Israel’s weapons of mass destruction. Why should that country, alone in the region, possess such weapons? If its security is sacrosanct, what about the security of the Palestinians, or of the Lebanese? And why should the US, in the midst of a dire financial crisis, continue to bankroll a country that superbly ignores all its requests, such as stopping settlements in the Occupied Territories?

The west must understand that before being Ba’athist or Islamist, or communist in the past, countries are inhabited by people possessing common humanity, with the same right to live, regardless of ideology. The west must choose realism that unites over ideology that divides. It is only then that we will move towards achieving our real interests, which presuppose peaceful relations between different social systems and mutual respect of national sovereignty.

Ultimately, our interests, if well understood, coincide with those of the rest of mankind.

• Hans Christof von Sponeck was UN assistant secretary general and United Nations humanitarian co-ordinator for Iraq from 1998-2000

Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann was president of the UN general assembly between 2008 and 2009 and foreign minister of Nicaragua from 1979 to 1990

Denis J Halliday was UN assistant secretary general from 1994-98

Formal Articles of Impeachment of Obama Prepared for the Congress of the United States

URGENT —

Formal Articles of Impeachment of Obama Prepared for the Congress of the United States… 

souza13.jpg

“Resolution Impeaching Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.”


       Download


Resolution Impeaching Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article I

In his conduct while President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has willfully corrupted and manipulated the executive branch to increase its power and destroy the balance of powers between the three branches of government that is established by the Constitution of the United States.

The means used to implement this course of conduct or scheme included one or more of the following acts:

(1)  Shortly after being sworn in for his first term as President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama began creating new departments and appointing Czars to oversee these departments. These Czars were never submitted to the United States Senate for approval as required by Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. In addition, these Czars and the Departments have budgets that are not subject to being controlled by Congress as provided for by Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. He also made recess appointments when the Senate was not in recess.

(2)  Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution mandates that the President of the United States “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…” Barack Hussein Obama, in violation of his oath of office has repeatedly ignored this Constitutional mandate by refusing to enforce laws against illegal immigration, defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and refusing to enforce Federal voting laws.

(3)  Article 1 of the Constitution establishes the legislative branch of the U.S. government and sets forth the powers of the Senate and House of Representatives to make laws. These powers are exclusive and the Constitution does not grant the President the power to either make laws or amend them on his own. Barack Hussein Obama has ignored these provisions and made or changed laws by either issuing unconstitutional executive orders or instructing governmental departments to take illegal and unconstitutional actions. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:

  1. A.   Ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to implement portions of the Cap & Trade bill that failed to pass in the U.S. Senate.
  2. B.   Ordering implementation of portions of the “Dream Act” that failed to pass in Congress.
  3. C.   Orchestrating a government takeover of a major part of the automobile industry in 2009.
  4. D.   Ordering a moratorium on new offshore oil and gas exploration and production without approval of Congress.
  5. E.   Signing an Executive Order on March 16, 2012 giving himself and the Executive branch extraordinary powers to control and allocate resources such as food, water, energy and health care resources etc. in the interest of vaguely defined national defense issues. It would amount to a complete government takeover of the U.S. economy.
  6. F.    Signing an Executive Order on July 6, 2012 giving himself and the Executive branch the power to control all methods of communications in the United States based on a Presidential declaration of a national emergency.
  7. G.  Signing an Executive Order on January 6, 2013 that contained 23 actions designed to limit the individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
  8. H.  Amending portions of the Affordable Healthcare Act and other laws passed by Congress without Congressional approval as required by Article 1 of the Constitution.

Article II

(1) Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution mandates that from time to time the President “shall give to Congress information on the State of the Union….” Implicit in this is an obligation for the President to be truthful with the Congress and the American people. Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly violated his oath of office and the requirements of the Constitution by willfully withholding information on important issues or actively taken part in misleading the Congress and the American people. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:

  1. A.   Using Executive privilege to block Congress from getting documents relating to the DOJ’s Operation Fast and Furious and the death of U.S. Border Patrol Brian Terry.
  2. B.   Had members of his administration provide false information about the act of terrorism committed in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012 and refusing to allow the State Department and other federal agencies to cooperate in the Congressional investigation.
  3. C.   Falsely labeled the mass murder of American soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas as “workplace violence” instead of the act of Islamic terrorism it was.
  4. D.   Falsely labeling the IRS targeting of conservative and Christian groups as a “phony” scandal and refusing to order an active pursuit of the investigation into who was ultimately responsible.
  5. E.   Refusing to order an independent investigation of the actions of Eric Holder and the DOJ in targeting the phone records of members of the news media.
  6. F.    Telling the American people on a television show that the NSA was not prying into the emails and phone calls of Americans when the facts prove otherwise

(2) The oath of office of the President of the United States requires him to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. This obviously includes what may be the most important part of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly violated his oath of office by seeking to limit both the individual rights and the rights of the States guaranteed in the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:

  1. A.    Having the Department of Health and Human Services order religious institutions and businesses owned by religious families to provide their employees free contraception and other services that are contrary to their religious beliefs. This is being done under the auspices of the Affordable Health Care Act and violates the religious freedom clauses of the First Amendment.  
  2. B.    Having the military place restrictions on the religious freedom of Chaplains and other members of the military in order to favor gay rights advocates and atheists in violation of the First Amendment.
  3. C.    Having the military place restrictions on the freedom of speech of members of the military and the civilian employees of the DOD in violation of their rights under the First Amendment.
  4. D.    Using Executive orders and government agency actions to limit Second Amendment rights. This includes actions by the Veterans Administration to disarm American veterans without due process as required by the Fifth Amendment.
  5. E.    Having the National Security Agency intercept and monitor the private communications of millions of Americans without a court order and in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
  6. F.     Joining with foreign governments in lawsuits against sovereign U.S. states to prohibit them from enforcing immigration laws. This is in violation of the Tenth Amendment.
  7. G.   Filing suits under the Voting Rights Act against sovereign U.S. states to prevent them from enforcing Voter ID laws despite rulings by the Supreme Court upholding these laws. This is another violation of the Tenth Amendment and the balance of powers.

(3) Under Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution the President of the United States is the Commander in Chief of the United States military and as such is responsible for using them in a manner that best serves the national security of the United States and protects our soldiers from unnecessary risks and harm. Barack Hussein Obama has violated his oath of office in this regard. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:

  1. A.   In the name of  “political correctness,” he imposed unnecessary and dangerous rules of engagement on our troops in combat causing them to lose offensive and defensive capabilities and putting them in danger. Many American service personnel have been killed or wounded as a result of this policy.
  2. B.   Releasing the identity of American military personnel and units engaged in dangerous and secret operations such as the killing of Osama bin Laden by Navy Seal team 6.
  3. C.   Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Yet, without consulting Congress President Obama ordered the American military into action in Libya.

In all of this, Barack Hussein Obama has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, Barack Hussein Obama, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

 


Written by Michael Connelly, Constitutional Attorney

mrobertc [at] hotmail.com

AUTHOR’S NOTE: I have prepared these formal Articles of Impeachment as a Constitutional lawyer. They are in proper legal form and I believe all allegations are provable. They will be sent to Congress with annotations.

It’s On, People!!—-Truckers Ride For The Constitution Today…Help Tie-Up I-495!

Paul Joseph Watson gives retraction for false Infowars story on Nat. Guard closing I-495
“Retraction from Paul Joseph Watson is as follows:[10/10/13 Demonstrators under the banner of Truckers Ride for the Constitution will arrive in DC tomorrow morning to snarl traffic as part of “a shot across the bow that will ripple across all branches of government.” 10,000 truckers are expected to continually circle the Beltway for three days, taking up two lanes and keeping a third clear to allow access for emergency vehicles.
The group said speculation that the National Guard would block the Beltway was inaccurate, stating, “The Virginia State Police are working closely with our organization and have assured us that no such orders to the National Guard exist.”
The American people are sick and tired of the corruption that is destroying America!
We therefore declare a GENERAL STRIKE on the weekend of October 11-13, 2013!
Truck drivers will not haul freight! Americans can strike in solidarity with truck drivers!
Description

Please send all media inquiries to media@ridefortheconstitution.org.
(Formerly “Truckers To Shutdown America” – Page was shutdown @ 86,000 LIKES)
Visit RideForTheConstitution.org to receive constant updates and tune in to our daily radio show updates. The American people are sick and tired of the corruption that is destroying America! We therefore declare a national protest in support of our nation’s truckers on the weekend of October 11-13, 2013! Truck drivers will not haul freight! Americans can strike in solidarity with truck drivers! Truckers will lead the path to saving our country if every American rides with them! Our original FB was ‘Truckers To Shutdown America” and it was attacked and shutdown by Facebook. PLEASE BE SURE TO LIKE THIS PAGE AND BOOKMARK OUR WEBSITE ASAP IN CASE THIS PAGE IS ATTACKED AGAIN

Truckers’ General Strike On DC Starts Tomorrow…Make It the Beginning of Second American Revolution

hammerdown

GENERAL STRIKE CALLED for Entire United States—October 11-13 (Yes We Can!)

Related articles:
Wall Street Still Sucking Life Out of America Like Vampires at a Blood Drive
Civil disobedience rising across America as citizens fed up with criminal government

Strike Updates: Police Protest

http://generalstrikeusa.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/strike-updates-police-protest/

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1479400.1381246989%21/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/burn9n-1-web.jpg” width=”635″ height=”476″ /> EXCLUSIVE PHOTO: People try to help John Constantino, who apparently set himself on fire on the on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. on Friday.—Terry Hayes

John Constantino “didn’t like the government for some reason,” neighbor Joe Horner told The Daily News.

“He said they were a waste of time, effort and money,” Horner, 56, said. “He said to me, ‘They’re no good. They don’t look out for us and they don’t care about anything but their own pockets.’”

LATER, HE WENT TO THE WASHINGTON MALL, SALUTED THE CONGRESS AND THEN BURNED HIMSELF TO DEATH, MAKING THE ULTIMATE STATEMENT TO ALL AMERICANS.

Was He Expecting His Tunisian Moment from the American Sheeple?