America Under Siege


To what extent do you fear out of control government? Are you among those who see the overstepping of a tyrannical administration, or are you not aware of the world beyond what occurs in our own life? Regardless of your character type, do you ever consider that today just might be your last day? Or that it just might be at the hands of a ruthless tyrant by the title President of the United States?

Truth be told, whether that tyrant is this president or another down the line, the doorway for expulsion from this country is open and levied by one person: the POTUS. With directives and Acts paving the way of the future for our leaders to have the upper hand in all matters, the lives of every human being on this soil falls on the whim of a President. Thusly, it is the duty of every human being on this soil to wake up and get active.

In a Washington Times article that was released last week, the article outlines a 2010 directive that created presidential authority for the use of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, in operations against domestic unrest. The directive, at first glance, seems to be indifferent than any other directive that comes out of the Department of Defense. That is, until you dig a little deeper into the directive, that’s when you start to scratch our head.

In section 4 (a) the directive reads:

“This Directive shall be implemented consistent with national security objectives and military readiness.”

3(i) then goes on to state:

“Federal military forces shall not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized by the President in accordance with applicable law (e.g., chapter 15 of Reference (d)) or permitted under emergency authority, as described below (see DoDD 3025.12 (Reference (j)) and DoDD 5525.5 (Reference (c))

In 2012, the National Defense Authorization Act (N.D.A.A.) was signed into law. This was the infamous bill which contained Sections. 1021 and 1022 that authorized Congress to work in conjunction with the FISA Courts to determine whether someone is a “Domestic Terrorist” and what actions the Federal Government should take against them.  Deep within the N.D.A.A. is Section 1021 and 1022, is where we run into the “Counter-terrorism” sections of the bill. [Title X, Subtitle D] the authorization for the indefinite military detention of persons the government suspects of involvement in terrorism, including U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, although the ability to indefinitely detain an individual has been in place since 2002.

The  Authorization for Use of Military Forces (AUMF) was signed into law under the Bush administration. In 2012, congress vested the power within themselves to “affirm” this power within themselves. In July of 2012, a study was conducted by the University of Maryland and partly paid for by the Department of Homeland Security, titled “National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism,” S.T.A.R.T. for short.

In their study, on pages 9 and 10, they listed the various “groups” in which would be considered “suspect” of being homegrown terrorists. These groups are referred to as “Dominant Ideologies” and include the following: Extreme Left – Wing, Extreme Right – Wing, Religious, Ethno-nationalist/Separatist  and Single Issue persons. In other words, everyone within the United States that might decide to redress their grievances with their government.

If you’re keeping up, the short of it is that the government just granted itself the right to be unconstitutional by detaining citizens that fit the government’s stereotype of home-grown bad guys; and further, can use the military (including drones) to squash supposed “threats”… to “national security.”

According to an article by the Washington Times released May 28, 2014, the latter was the very proposition put before the President regarding the “event” at Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Bunkerville, NV.

“A U.S. official said the Obama administration considered  but rejected deploying military force under the directive during the recent standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his armed supporters.”


While PANDA does not take an official stance on The Bundy Ranch incident, the evidence is clear as to what extreme the Federal Government is willing to go.

Perhaps if you don’t already, you should start counting your blessings every day that by the good graces of a tyrant you weren’t massacred for someone’s stereotyping you.

Despite the extreme effort that was taken by the militias on the ground to maintain peace, prominent members of the government, including Harry Reid, want to suggest that the actions that occurred in the desert of Bunkerville were at the hands of a chaotic group of “domestic terrorists“ threatening the national security. Other officials even negated the threat that the BLM initiated against citizens; for example: pushing people to the ground and pointing weapons at them. The very charges being rumored against members of the militia for standing up for the rights of his fellow man.

Although no weapons were fired, although no injuries (to the BLM or law enforcement, at least) were sustained, although no threats were ever made against the BLM or officers… This directive and Act came across the desk of the President as an option against American citizens who were standing up for their rights. Fortunately, he declined.

Thank, Obama Almighty, today those people will live to see another day. Tomorrow? Well, we’ll see.

See, the problem is not who the President is. The problem is that this is a power vested upon whoever the President is at the time. The N.D.A.A. is one of those evolutionary documents. The kind that the government loves, because they can alter it over and over again; taking, little by little, the rights of the nation, until finally, we can’t fight back and we’re ripe for the crushing.

Even if you don’t want to believe something like that would or could ever happen, you have to acknowledge the power is there, and eventually someone will test those waters. It’s inevitability, or they would not have adopted such legislation.

Article by: Jason Turner and Sabrina Black of















Speak Your Mind