Over the past few months the American people have witnessed numerous examples of an administration which has no concept of individual liberty. President Obama has been working, often in the open, to strip a complacent public of their (supposedly guaranteed) constitutional rights. While this pattern of myopic power-lust did not begin with the current regime, the alarming acceleration of these occurrences is new. With these new attacks come new ways to rein in Big Government and halt this thinking that our rights are mutable.

Those who have demonstrated an active disregard for our rights have made no secret of their dangerous views. Senators such as John McCain and Lindsey Graham’s critical error in policy stem from their misguided approaches to protecting the American people. In the eyes of the establishment on both sides of the isle, privacy is the enemy. “Innocent until proven guilty” turns into “what do you have to hide”?”

This is not just referring to the recent discovery of the long suspected fact that the NSA is collecting information on us through our calls, emails, and texts. I am talking about the pattern of totalitarianism that is emerging right before our eyes. Drone strikes on American citizens, drones surveying our every move, Department of Justice warrantlessly intruding on the freedom of the press, and government bureaucrats targeting us for our beliefs- and those are just examples from what little we are aware of. Yet even when all these offences occur in the same year, the American public is slow to act.

Many prefer to place their trust in an administration that has repeatedly been proven untrustworthy. These are not the acts of an administration protecting a country’s national security. These are the Orwellian acts of a regime seemingly bent on obtaining as much control and power as possible while citizens remain in an either ignorant or listless stupor.

Two paths lay before us. We can either sit at our computers and shake our heads at how bad things look in our country or we can take a stand against oppression and fight for our inalienable rights.  Campaign for Liberty is fighting to end warrantless wiretapping, along with other threats to our liberties such as indefinite detention. But as always, in order for change to occur action is required from grassroots Americans like you. Give up a couple minutes of head-shaking to take a simple step in defeating totalitarianism in our country: Sign your Fourth Amendment Pledge of Support here

The post A Pattern of Totalitarianism Emerges appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

The post George Orwell call your office appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

President Obama announced late last week that the US intelligence community had just determined that the Syrian government had used poison gas on a small scale, killing some 100 people in a civil conflict that has claimed an estimated 100,000 lives. Because of this use of gas, the president claimed, Syria had crossed his “red line” and the US must begin to arm the rebels fighting to overthrow the Syrian government.

Setting aside the question of why 100 killed by gas is somehow more important than 99,900 killed by other means, the fact is his above explanation is full of holes. The Washington Post reported this week that the decision to overtly arm the Syrian rebels was made “weeks ago” – in other words, it was made at a time when the intelligence community did not believe “with high confidence” that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons.

Further, this plan to transfer weapons to the Syrian rebels had become policy much earlier than that, as the Washington Post reported that the CIA had expanded over the past year its secret bases in Jordan to prepare for the transfer of weapons to the rebels in Syria.

The process was identical to the massive deception campaign that led us into the Iraq war. Remember the famous quote from the leaked “Downing Street Memo,” where representatives of British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s administration discussed Washington’s push for war on Iraq?

Here the head of British intelligence was reporting back to his government after a trip to Washington in the summer of 2002:

“Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”

That is exactly what the Obama Administration is doing with Syria: fixing the intelligence and facts around the already determined policy. And Congress just goes along, just as they did the last time.

We found out shortly after the Iraq war started that the facts and intelligence being fixed around the policy were nothing but lies put forth by the neo-con warmongers and the paid informants, like the infamous and admitted liar known as “Curveball.” But we seem to have learned nothing from being fooled before.

So Obama now plans to send even more weapons to the Syrian rebels even though his administration is aware that the main rebel factions have pledged their loyalty to al-Qaeda. Does anyone else see the irony? After 12 years of the “war on terror” and the struggle against al-Qaeda, the US decided to provide weapons to the allies of al-Qaeda. Does anyone really think this is a good idea?

The Obama administration promises us that this is to be a very limited operation, providing small arms only, with no plans for a no-fly zone or American boots on the ground. That sounds an awful lot like how Vietnam started. Just a few advisors. When these few small arms do not achieve the pre-determined US policy of regime change in Syria what is the administration going to do? Admit failure and pull the troops out, or escalate? History suggests the answer and it now appears to be repeating itself once again.

The president has opened a can of worms that will destroy his presidency and possibly destroy this country. Another multi-billion dollar war has begun.

Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

The post Obama’s Syria Policy Looks a Lot Like Bush’s Iraq Policy appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

This week the House of Representatives considered the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. As part of their debate, the House considered 172 amendments. Among these amendments were ones dealing indefinite detention, the use of unmanned drones both in the US and abroad, and whether or not the US Government needs to reduce its spending on overseas militarism (SPOILER ALERT: It does).

Sadly, one amendment that was denied a vote was an amendment filed by California Democrat Barbra Lee and Georgia Republican Paul Broun to repeal the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). This was an important amendment because apologists for the President claim the 2001 AUMF gives the President authority to spy, detain, and even kill anyone he chooses.

The 2001 AUMF was passed just days following the September 11 attacks, and it authorized the President “to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001…” [emphasis added]

Congress did give the President broad powers in the bill but only as far as they related to bring those responsible for the September 11 attacks to justice. Yet the Obama Administration uses the 2001 AUMF to justify actions that have no relationship to the 2001 attacks.

Twelve years after the terrorists attacks, and two years after American forces captured and killed Osama Bin Laden, it certainly seems reasonable for Congress to at least debate repealing the 2001 AUMF. Hopefully, there will be other opportunities for Congress to consider repealing the 2001 AUMF this year.

The post Congress misses an opportunity to rein in Obama appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

“Every American should be outraged at the federal government’s blatant disregard for the Fourth Amendment,” said C4L Vice President of Programs, Matt Hawes about this fight. “This type of sweeping surveillance would have been better suited to 20th century dictatorships than what is supposed to be a Republic based on individual liberty.”

“Since our founding in 2008, Campaign for Liberty has led the grassroots fight to repeal the so-called ‘Patriot’ Act and roll back other deeply disturbing government intrusions into our lives,” Hawes continued. “Such revelations only further deepen our determination to restore the Constitution and protect the privacy rights of all Americans.”

Campaign for Liberty is currently pursuing all options, including litigation, to ensure Americans’ right to privacy.

###

The post Campaign for Liberty Joins Rand Paul to Fight NSA appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

According to Politico, many members of Congress and their aides are leaving Capitol Hill because their health insurance premiums will be increasing next year because of…Obamacare.

 Fortunately, Congressional leadership has quietly assured representatives and senators that “fixing this” is a top priority. Too bad Congress is not prioritizing  “fixing” the problems Obamacare is causing the rest of us.

 Maybe next time Congress will find out what is in the bill BEFORE passing it.

The post Maybe they should have read the bill appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

Read more from their joint press release below:

Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Trey Radel (FL-19) along with co-sponsors Congressman Justin Amash (MI-03), Congressman Thomas Massie (KY-04) and Congressman Matt Salmon (AZ-05) introduced two amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The first NDAA amendment offered by the group prohibits the federal government from using lethal military force, specifically the use of unmanned aircrafts, on American citizens on American soil. This amendment mirrors legislation introduced earlier this year by Reps. Radel, Amash and Massie.

The second NDAA amendment from the group requires the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress an annual report on US citizens subject to military detention. The report will include their names, the legal justification for their detention and the steps being taken to provide each with due process of law. This amendment holds the executive branch accountable by shining light into the military detention process.

“The government should be a vigilant defender of our civil liberties,” said Rep. Radel. “These amendments add yet another layer of protection to the rights of American citizens, granting them the due process they deserve when it comes to the use lethal military force and military detentions.”

“The Constitution protects Americans from being killed or imprisoned by their own government without due process,” said Rep. Amash. “Our amendments ensure that Americans do not have to fear that lethal military force will be used against them here in the United States and that Members of Congress and the public will know when the President is using the unconstitutional authority provided in the 2012 NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans without charge or trial.”

“The NDAA is another example of legislation that Congress continues to pass without regard for our Constitution,” said Rep. Massie. “These amendments ensure our Fifth Amendment rights are observed, and I look forward to working with Rep. Radel, Rep. Amash, and Rep. Salmon to protect Americans’ civil liberties.”

“Protecting U.S. civil liberties and our constitutional right to due process is not up for debate,” said Rep. Salmon. “That’s why it is important to clarify our laws and ensure these protections for U.S. citizens are never infringed upon.”

CLICK HERE for text of no use of lethal military force against Americans on American soil amendment.

CLICK HERE for text of military detention accountability amendment.

There will also be another opportunity for your representative to vote on preventing indefinite detention. Contact your representative and urge them to support these common sense amendments that serve to strengthen the civil liberties of all Americans.

The post Strengthening Civil Liberties With the NDAA appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

The Supreme Court of the United States is set to rule on a key case concerning affirmative action by the end of the month.  As explained in this CNN report, the outcome of the case, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, will set a precedent either allowing or denying state sponsored institutions the authority to make judgments about individuals on racial grounds.

“Fisher sued the state university after her college application was rejected in 2008 when she was a high school senior in Sugar Land, Texas, outside Houston.

“She claims the individualized, discretionary admission policies violate her rights, and favor African-American and Hispanic applicants over whites and Asian-Americans.”

“The school… defends the educational benefits of its “holistic” policy of considering race as one of many factors — designed to create a diverse campus.

The Obama administration agrees and is backing the school, saying to grow a nation built on differing complexions and backgrounds will depend on future leaders “who possess the understanding of diversity that is necessary to govern and defend the United States.”

To be frank, it is appalling that race is still considered when applying for higher education.  It seems that affirmative action’s advocates have completely lost sight of the core principles behind the civil rights movement of half a century ago.  Martin Luther King’s dream wasn’t to see the roles of previous racial injustice reversed; it was to see a day when people weren’t defined by race whatsoever, being judged “not… by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

The CNN report aptly compared the situation facing Fischer with a similar scenario from the 1950s, in which Heman Sweatt was denied admission to a law school due to the government mandated “separate but equal” segregation.  The government required institutions of higher learning to make judgments about individuals based on nothing more than external appearances, such as skin complexion.  Clearly such legislation is unjust, yet many fail to question similar racial judgments employed today in the name of “diversity” with the same level of critical-mindedness or oppose it with indignation.

Campaign for Liberty’s chairman Ron Paul once addressed the fundamental problem underlying government involvement in racial issues, commenting:

“Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals… as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.  The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.”

The U.S. government was designed to protect the rights of individuals; all who stand for liberty should wholeheartedly oppose any combination of racial judgment and government.

The post Supreme Court to Rule on Race in College Admissions appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

Learn more about his Kickstarter project for his “Liberty is Rising Truth in Media” effort here: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/439668500/liberty-is-rising-truth-in-media-project-0

The post VIDEO: Ben Swann on Campaign for Liberty and His New Project appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.

“The Fourth Amendment is clear; we should be secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects, and all warrants must have probable cause. Today the government operates largely in secret, while seeking to know everything about our private lives – without probable cause and without a warrant.

“The government does not need to know more about what we are doing. We need to know more about what the government is doing.

“We should be thankful for individuals like Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald who see injustice being carried out by their own government and speak out, despite the risk. They have done a great service to the American people by exposing the truth about what our government is doing in secret.”

###

The post Ron Paul: We need to know more about what the government is doing appeared first on Campaign for Liberty.