Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #35505
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    read the video description , it pretty much explains what the deal is , the video itself is not the important issue , so read the authors description .

    #35527
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Detaining Americans indefinitely, without trial, through the use of military force is well established. Every year since its inception in 2012, President Obama has re-extended the provisions. The idea of American military members detaining you without a trial, for an indefinite amount of time, is eye opening to some, and that’s exactly why states have begun to slowly but surely nullify federal detention.

    The state legislature isn’t the only body that can reject NDAA powers. There are also the county bodies: both the states along with their divided counties have been on the offensive. Having success most recently are Idaho’s council members in Emmett who passed NDAA-blocking legislation by a count of 5 to 1. The “Restoring Constitutional Governance Resolution” effectively rejects the enforcement of indefinite detention.

    #35531
    Profile photo of freedom
    freedom
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Agree with 74, The NDAA powers are being rejected by many states and I hope that the state national guards will follow the state laws.

    #35538
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    Good for them. There needs to be more of this.

    #35539
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    Freedom
    Not sure if we did or not , but Arizona was at one point voting on weather or not to start up its own militia , separate from the national guard and so could NOT be federalized . So it would be very possible in that scenario , that the State Militia ( answerable to the state governor only ) could be in conflict with the AZ national guard ( who are kissing the feds butt ) . Not sure how it works, but I think the Governor of each state has to release the national guard for federalization . Either way , legislation at the state level needs to be in place to counter Washington .

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #35541
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    Does anyone here know if a Governor has ever refused a request to federalize their National Guard for deployment somewhere? Or do they waive that option when they accept equipment/supplies/money from the feds? My guess is that they waive the option when the feds fund the National Guard.

    #35543
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    That is possible .

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.