Author Topic: Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial  (Read 985 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ajax

  • Lieutenant Major
  • *
  • Posts: 1196
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« on: November 27, 2011, 07:49:50 AM »
Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial

NDAA detention provision would turn America into a “battlefield”

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial 1402565016 705d95495b

The Senate is set to vote on a bill next week that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

“The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.

Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor Monday, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.

The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing. The language appears in sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA bill.

“I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech last week. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.”


This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.

“American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?” asks Anders.

The ACLU is urging citizens to call their Senator and demand that the Udall Amendment be added to the bill, a change that would at least act as a check to prevent Americans being snatched off the streets without some form of Congressional oversight.

We have been warning for over a decade that Americans would become the target of laws supposedly aimed at terrorists and enemy combatants. Alex Jones personally documented how U.S. troops were being trained to arrest U.S. citizens in the event of martial law during urban warfare training drills back in the 90′s. Under the the National Defense Authorization Act bill, no declaration of martial law is necessary since Americans would now be subject to the same treatment as suspected insurgents in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.

If you thought that the executive assassination of American citizens abroad was bad enough, now similar powers will be extended to the “homeland,” in other words, your town, your community, your back yard.
_________________________________________________________________________
nice
"There is no longer any room for hope"

Offline impatient

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2011, 01:35:53 PM »
I think this is a sleight-of-hand designed to get the public's approval of the illegal detention and torture of those held at Guantanamo and other offshore prisons. 

The prisoners at Guantanamo create the appearance of an ongoing terrorist threat and give verisimilitude to the preposterous 9/11 tale - a lie that continues to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Exempting American citizens does nothing to correct the fundamental illegality of the law and , as we saw with al Awlaki, it does not protect American citizens from extra-judicial execution.

Offline Ajax

  • Lieutenant Major
  • *
  • Posts: 1196
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2011, 07:36:22 PM »
I think this is a sleight-of-hand designed to get the public's approval of the illegal detention and torture of those held at Guantanamo and other offshore prisons. 

The prisoners at Guantanamo create the appearance of an ongoing terrorist threat and give verisimilitude to the preposterous 9/11 tale - a lie that continues to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Exempting American citizens does nothing to correct the fundamental illegality of the law and , as we saw with al Awlaki, it does not protect American citizens from extra-judicial execution.
There may be another reason >>

http://www.rense.com/general95/amlur.htm
America Lurches Toward Full-Blown Tyranny
By Stephen Lendman
12-3-11
 

Post-9/11, America's moved steadily toward eroding democracy entirely. Justification given is war on terror hokum. Incrementally, international, constitutional and statute laws have been trashed.
 
Equity, justice and other democratic values long ago were abandoned to advance America's imperium. On May 26, the House voted to abolish freedom entirely - HR 1540, 322 - 96.
 
On December 1, the Senate did likewise - S. 1867, 93 to 7. Both versions assure no one anywhere is now safe, including law-abiding US citizens.
 
Senate no votes were cast by Thomas Harkin (D. IA), Rand Paul (R. KY), Thomas Coburn (R. OK), Jeff Merkley (D. OR), Ron Wyden (D. OR), Mike Lee (R. UT), and Bernie Sanders (I. VT).
 
Of the Senate's 51 Democrats, only one voted no.
 
At issue are Sections 1031 and 1032 of the FY 2012 National Defense Authorization Act - NDAA (S. 1867).
 
Section 1031 authorizes indefinitely detaining US citizens without charge or trial. It exceeds previous police state laws. The provision refers to US citizens or lawful resident aliens even though the Constitution protects them. No longer.
 
Enactment means anyone anywhere, including US citizens, may be indefinitely held without charge or trial, based solely on suspicions, baseless allegations or none at all.
 
No reasonable proof is required, just suspicions that those detained pose threats. Under subsection (b)(1), indefinite detentions can follow mere membership (past or present) or support for suspect organizations.
 
Presidents would have unchecked authority to arrest, interrogate and indefinitely detain law-abiding citizens if accused of potentially posing a threat.
 
Constitutional, statute and international laws won't apply. Martial law will replace them.
 
Like the companion House bill (HR 1540), detention would be authorized based on alleged prior associations with suspect groups.
 
US military personnel anywhere in the world would be authorized to seize US citizens and others.
 
Section 1032 requires suspects held in military custody, outside constitutionally mandated civil protections, including habeas rights, due process, and other judicial procedures.
 
Presidents could order anyone arrested and imprisoned for life without charge or trial.
 
Abuse of power would replace rule of law protections.
 
Even someone erroneously arrested and cleared of wrongdoing could be held indefinitely without charge, given non-civil trials, none at all, or sent abroad to torture prison hellholes.
 
On November 29, the Senate voted 60 - 38 against Mark Udall's (D. CO) amendment. If adopted, it would have prohibited the military from arresting and imprisoning anyone anywhere without charge or trial, including US citizens.
 
An orderly review of presidential and congressional detention power would have been authorized. Before adjourning, House and Senate conferees will resolve the issue one way or other. Removing harmful provisions is doubtful.
 
If not, Obama promised a veto. So far, he's broken EVERY major promise made. Given enough congressional votes to override him, it hardly matters what he does.
 
December 8 is the House's targeted adjournment date. The Senate date is yet to be announced. Key legislation must be completed before leaving, including resolving language in FY 2012 NDAA.
 
Obama must then sign or veto it. Congress returns on January 5. Will he keep his promise or sign the bill to assure defense funding continuity? Electoral politics suggests the latter.
 
Moreover, S. 1867 sponsor Carl Levin said Obama officials were involved in drafting the bill. Both sides apparently agreed on final language.
 
Some Post-9/11 Background
 
On September 18, 2001, a joint House-Senate Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) approved permanent war on humanity. Thereafter, America's lurched from one to another. Expect more ahead.
 
On November 13, 2001, George Bush issued Military Order Number 1. It was a watershed coup d'etat action.
 
It authorized presidents to capture, kidnap or otherwise arrest non-citizens (citizens were later included) anywhere in the world based on unproved allegations of involvement in international terrorism. Moreover, it approved holding them indefinitely without charge, evidence or due process rights.
 
It stipulated that trials, if held, will be in secret military commissions, not civil courts. Torture obtained evidence is allowed, and appeal rights are denied those convicted.
 
Capitalizing on a window of hysteria, numerous laws, Executive Orders, findings, memoranda, and memos, as well as National and Homeland Security Presidential Directives followed (NSPDs and HSPDs). Constitutional rights eroded. Unchecked police state powers hardened.
 
On October 26, 2001, 45 days post-9/11, Congress overwhelmingly passed the USA Patriot Act. Civil liberties were eroded, including Fifth and Fourteen Amendment due process rights by permitting indefinite detentions of undocumented immigrants that now apply to anyone anywhere.
 
First Amendment freedom of association was compromised. Now anyone may be prosecuted for their alleged association with "undesirable groups."
 
Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches and seizures are gone, including personal privacy rights.
 
Unchecked government surveillance powers were authorized to access personal records, monitor financial transactions, as well as student, medical and other records.
 
Secret evidence may be obtained lawlessly and withheld from defense lawyers.
 
For the first time, "domestic terrorism" was criminalized. It applies to US citizens and aliens. It states criminal law violations are considered domestic terrorist acts if they aim to "influence (government policy) by intimidation, coercion (or) intimidate or coerce a civilian population."
 
In other words, anti-war, global justice, environmental and animal rights activism, as well as Occupy Wall Street activism may be designated "domestic terrorism." So may civil disobedience and dissent of any kind to prevent it entirely.
 
On October 1, 2002, USNORTHCOM's establishment was step one to militarizing America.
 
The November 25, 2002 Homeland Security Act (HSA) centralized unprecedented executive branch military and law enforcement powers.
 
The October 17, 2006 Military Commissions Act scrapped habeas protections for domestic and foreign enemies alike, citizens and non-citizens, stating:
 
"Any person is punishable... who....aids, abets, counsels, commands, or procures" and in so doing helps a foreign enemy, provides "material support" to alleged terrorist groups, engages in spying, or commits other offenses previously handled in civil courts.
 
It also authorized torture and empowered presidents to convene military commissions to try anyone called "unlawful enemy combatants." They now designated "unprivileged enemy belligerents."
 
On the same date, little know FY 2007 NDAA provisions (Sections 1076 and 333) amended the Insurrection Act of 1807 and Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.
 
They prohibit using federal and National Guard troops for law enforcement domestically except as constitutionally allowed or expressly authorized by Congress in times of a national emergency like an insurrection.
 
Presidents may now claim public emergency powers, effectively declare martial law, suspend the Constitution for "national security" reasons, and deploy federal and National Guard troops on America's streets to suppress whatever he calls disorder.
 
The key April 4, 2007 NSPD-51/HSPD-20 combined directive established "Continuity of Government (COG)" procedures under Catastrophic Emergency conditions, defined as:
 
"any incident (such as a terrorist attack), regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the US population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."
 
COG is then defined as:
 
"a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency."
 
The combined directive gave the president and DHS unprecedented police state powers to declare martial law without congressional approval, and be able to rule extrajudicially, free from constitutional constrains. It also let the vice-president assume dictatorial powers. Clever wording marginalized Bush, saying:
 
NSPD 51 "shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved."
 
"Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions."
 
Civil liberties were further eroded by institutionalized spying, other forms of surveillance, waging war on Islam, criminalizing dissent, creating a culture of secrecy, militarizing police, punishing whistleblowers, using courts as persecution instruments, and governing extrajudicially overall.
 
If FY 2012 NDAA includes Sections 1031 and 1032, America more than ever will be repressive and unfit live in.
 
How can it be if constitutional, statute and international law protections no longer apply.
 
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
 
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
 
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
"There is no longer any room for hope"

Offline laconas

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 13653
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #3 on: December 03, 2011, 09:01:42 PM »

They're getting the country ready for WWIII.
Nobody censors what they agree with

Offline Ajax

  • Lieutenant Major
  • *
  • Posts: 1196
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2011, 02:15:40 AM »
They're getting the country ready for WWIII.

Right.
"There is no longer any room for hope"

Offline Ajax

  • Lieutenant Major
  • *
  • Posts: 1196
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2011, 04:22:45 AM »
http://theintelhub.com/2011/12/03/when-governments-go-rogue/
When Governments Go Rogue

By Brandon Smith
Alt-Market
December 3, 2011

There are those today who would claim that the lifeblood of a nation is dependent upon the graces of its government.  That government is the focal point of cultural growth, and that we as citizens should respect it as such.  I would be more inclined to agree if the public did not so easily confuse the ideals of leadership with the actions of criminals.

That is to say, regardless of what we wish our government to be, bureaucracies rarely, if ever, embody the spirit of the common man (a necessity for any system that purports to defend the citizenry).

Instead, bureaucracies almost inevitably deteriorate into vehicles for the perpetuation of tyranny driven by the very worst of all stewards; elitist minorities with delusions of godhood.

Unfortunately, despite this fact, the masses often treat these industrious vermin and the plagues of society that they build with the same reverence as they would a sincere and honorable body politic.

Government is not nor has it ever been a foregone conclusion.  Government is not concrete.  It is not tangible.  It is not the foundation of society.  Instead, government is an abstraction; a fantastic dream of collectivist paternity in the face of individual hardship.

Those who fear to wander the world on their own courage, strength, and merit, seek to elevate and empower “decision makers” to provide the comfort of limited liability.  Through this process, governments are created out of thin air.

All governmental authority is, thus, HANDED to those in positions of leadership.  What makes one man a “king” and another man a “peasant”?  Only the people of a country, and where they choose to place their personal control; in their own hands, or the hands of others.

To put it simply, there is no power over us but that which we give away, and no freedom lost, that cannot be regained.

Until this reality is understood, consecutive generations of human beings will be left to wonder astonished at the endless atrocities of governments they thought they could trust.  The truth is, no government, no matter how seemingly noble, deserves our full faith.

All governments must be treated like storehouses of aging dynamite; with extreme vigilance, care, and suspicion, because, it is in the very nature of centralized power to sink towards destabilization and disaster.

The American dynamic was meant to be different.  For the first time in history, a group of people organized an administrative body which was predicated upon the will of the general populace and not the will of the incorporated elite.

The Constitution was the first legal document designed to LIMIT the power of government, not endlessly exonerate it.  Though many in our modern age have become completely ignorant of its original intent, the Constitution and its written protections allowed for the first decentralized government of the Western world, if not the entire world.

A government which was specifically tasked with shielding the rights of the individual beyond the desires of the mindless “majority”, or the normally influential aristocracy.

Obviously, we have strayed far and away beyond the schematics set forth by the founding fathers.

Let us finally be honest with ourselves and say it out loud; our government is not Constitutional!  It has become a mutation.  A monstrosity.  A malformed creature given birth by the oozing genetic material of mad social scientists hell bent on dominating the building blocks of our political life.  It is a thing to be abhorred, not admired, and certainly not to be trusted.

The statement above may be confusing to those who have relegated their concerns to the immediate.  If one is free to walk about the streets, keep a job, have a drink, and settle in front of his television for hours on end, then what is there to be worried about?  If he is not directly affected by the ill notions of men in far off banks and capitols, then why care at all?  If the pain of government criminality only strikes people from “other” cultures, or other walks of life, why be concerned?

For those who actually suffer from this brand of idiocy, I can only relate the unwarranted role that our government has assumed within our society and hope that they begin to realize how extraordinarily unsafe they really are.  The injustices visited upon the few are invariably visited upon the many in time, especially where a rogue government resides.

The kind of intrusion by government allowed by the American people today is utterly astounding.  Bank records, medical records, political viewpoints, phone conversations, emails, child rearing practices, food eating habits, health pursuits, social networking habits, biometric data, travel; nothing is safe from the prying eyes of government anymore.

At what point did we as a nation decide that the government’s opinion of the domestic ideal should become the precedent?  At what point did we decide that a faceless bureaucracy knows better than we do what is best for us?  When did our lives become an open book to be read at the government’s leisure?

I say “we decided”, because we must bear a large part of the blame.  From the institution of the Patriot Acts, to the utilization of the FISA domestic spying bill, to the latest monitoring and cataloging by the DHS and the Federal Reserve of private internet activity, we have stood by and done little to nothing in response.

The argument put forth by establishment proponents has always been that the government’s task is to keep us safe.  In order to do this, they say, there can be nowhere for “evil doers” to hide.  Therefore, the privacy of every individual must be sacrificed for the greater good of the greater number.  This argument is unabashed nonsense.

Governments do not keep people safe.  Governments are historically predisposed to ending far more lives than they protect, especially when they have strayed from their original mandates.  When a government goes rogue, or has been honed as a tool for control rather than defense, its directives lean towards self preservation, not the preservation of the public.  That is to say, the government and those who directly benefit from its manipulation set policies that ensure their own safety, and no one else’s.

Without a doubt, all the anti-4th Amendment legislation that has been passed over the course of last decade is focused not on some sinister force, foreign or domestic.  Instead, it has been focused on average American citizens, because, whether we want to admit it or not, the government sees US as their greatest enemy.

There was a time when even I would have considered this view as a bit “extreme”.  However, I would now have to point out the introduction of bills and executive orders like the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which essentially erases Posse Comitatus and allows for Martial Law to be instituted with extreme prejudice under executive authority:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:H.R.5122:

http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/

As well as the attempted passage of the Enemy Belligerents Act, which would allow for the capture, torture, and indefinite incarceration of American citizens as “enemy combatants:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s3081/show

Not to mention the National Emergency Centers Act which allows for the detention of civilians in military and FEMA run facilities:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645

Or the Obama Administration’s continuance of Bush doctrine which allows for the assassination of U.S. citizens designated as “enemy combatants”:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/world/middleeast/07yemen.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/26/AR2010012604239_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010012700394

And most recently, the National Defense Authorization Act, a defense spending action which is being used to coattail legislation which decimates all Constitutional checks and balances and leaves the door open for the government to declare any region they wish a “combat zone”.
Advertisement
Photobucket

These provisions are just a rewritten combination of the Enemy Belligerents Act (both bills were fostered by the hand of John McCain) and the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, giving government free reign to designate any person, even an American citizen, as an enemy combatant.  This means that anyone, including you, could one day be detained without Habeas Corpus, without fair trial, without due process, without legal representation, forever.  Period.

You think rendition only occurs in Middle Eastern hellholes?  Think again.  With these bills and others like them, the American public is now fair game.

Rationalizations for the above actions abound.  Some of the most common naïve positions include the following:

1)  Assassinations Against Al Qaeda Agents, Even If They Are American Citizens, Is Justifiable

The nature of the target is irrelevant to the principle underlying the situation.  I don’t care if Anwar al-Awlaki was an agent of Hades, the conscience of a country must take precedence over the short term threats that country faces.

If a society is unable to maintain its conscience and its principles in the face of hardship, then perhaps that society is not worthy of survival.  There are, indeed, many more important things than national security.

This is how all tyranny begins; with a small group or element of a culture singled out for the loss of human rights, while the rest of the people look on and cheer.  Eventually, the exception to the rule becomes the rule, and everyone suffers.

Under no circumstances should our government be allowed to rewrite Constitutional protections or our moral compass, even if it means giving so called “terrorists” fair treatment under the law.  Never forget, the term “terrorist” is as arbitrary as any nowadays, and could be used against you as easily as it could be used against anyone else.

2)  The Domestic Realm Is A Haven For “Homegrown Terrorists”

Again, “homegrown terrorism” is a highly arbitrary label.  If one looks at statements and white papers coming from the Department Of Homeland Security, or the Department Of Justice, anyone from Constitutionalists, to Ron Paul supporters, to militia members, to barter networkers and sound money proponents, or anyone who even expresses an interest in any of these subjects, is considered a potential domestic terrorist threat.

Where is this headed?  Think about it.  If these types of people are already being categorized as extremists, what’s to stop the government form categorizing them as enemy combatants?

3)  Rendition And Torture Could Save Lives

Okay.  Let’s say for the sake of argument that rendition and torture actually could save some lives, though I have never heard of any of these Jack Bauer moments taking place in the real world.  Let’s say my life and those I love could be spared.  Frankly, I would rather die than be a party to behavior as reprehensible as kidnapping and torture.

I couldn’t care less about the theoretical benefits of the activity.  As stated earlier, a nation hanging by the poisonous framework of moral relativism is doomed to failure and decay.  Despite the propaganda often spread by elitist elements within our government, our military, and our local law enforcement, you DO NOT need to become the monster in order to defeat the monster.  This lie should not be allowed to stand…

4)  You Are “Overreacting” To The Legislation, And Americans Will Not Be Targeted

Senator Lindsay Graham, a backer of the National Defense Authorization Act, specifically outlined the bill’s jurisdiction over American citizens and even admitted it makes the U.S. itself a “combat zone” under the international laws of war (while at the same time presenting the lie that Federal due process would somehow be enforced for those who are captured).

We who oppose the bill could do a lot more without being rightfully accused of “overreaction”.  If Americans are not to be targeted, then why create the bill in the first place?  Traditional laws of war would be more than sufficient to handle foreign threats, and domestic response agencies like the FBI could easily continue doing whatever it is they supposedly do to safeguard our country.

The ONLY reason to introduce a bill which frees the U.S. Government and the DHS to act militarily within the borders of our own nation would be to target U.S. citizens, and to undermine normal Constitutional processes.

The legislation is self-incriminating.  Only a complete dullard would argue otherwise.

5)  The Government Is A Body Elected By The People, Therefore They Are One And The Same

The only practical explanation I can think of for someone to actually believe this argument is overmedication.  Despite what we’re all taught in middle school, our government as it exists today and has for many decades does not represent the will of the people.  Two dominant political parties with cosmetic differences in rhetoric but nearly identical legislative platforms and voting records is not an expression of a legitimately free republic.

The system revolves around corporate ideologies of globalization, not elections.  Its beneficiaries are a limited and powerful fringe of society, not the masses.  It is a rigged game.  A fake battle between two gladiators owned by the same Caesar.  To say that the people and the government are one-in-the-same is a gross error in judgment.

After researching and acknowledging the course our government has taken, the question then arises; what is the ultimate end result?  Barring multiple miracles of a complete economic turnaround, full third party inclusion in our political structure, the deconstruction of the Federal Reserve, the decentralization of financial influence, the reintroduction of Constitutional insulation degraded since 2001, and the complete pullback of troops involved in ongoing wars in the Middle East, there can be only one outcome:  total conflict.

We did not create this division.  The American people did not ask to be targeted.  Though we certainly have not done enough to fend off the numerous attacks upon our general liberties, the root of the problem still lay within the core of our government, the puppet leaders who abuse it, and the corporate elitists who use it as a staging ground for personal agendas.

We have become two separate groups that cannot and will not be reconciled.  The government is openly admitting this through legislation like the National Defense Authorization Act.  Its time we did the same.

When two forces diametrically opposed exist upon the same ground at the same time with the same force of will, war erupts.  A war of philosophies, a war of dissent, and sometimes, a war of weapons.

As unsettling as that might sound, we must take solace in the fact that we at least fight for what is honest.  If every American must conform to the twisted path our government has chosen, or be branded an ‘enemy combatant”, then may we all become domestic threats in our own backyard.

You can contact Brandon Smith at:  brandon@alt-market.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
"There is no longer any room for hope"

Offline Rudi Jan

  • Administrator
  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 15352
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • aka LoneWolf
    • View Profile
    • FauxWorld
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2011, 08:03:30 AM »
Government is not nor has it ever been a foregone conclusion.  Government is not concrete.  It is not tangible.  It is not the foundation of society.  Instead, government is an abstraction; a fantastic dream of collectivist paternity in the face of individual hardship.

Those who fear to wander the world on their own courage, strength, and merit, seek to elevate and empower “decision makers” to provide the comfort of limited liability.  Through this process, governments are created out of thin air.

All governmental authority is, thus, HANDED to those in positions of leadership.  What makes one man a “king” and another man a “peasant”?  Only the people of a country, and where they choose to place their personal control; in their own hands, or the hands of others.

To put it simply, there is no power over us but that which we give away, and no freedom lost, that cannot be regained.

Those words bear repeating. Over and over.

The sad fact is that the people have chosen to become 14th amendment citizens and thus become subjects of the federal government. To then go against the government can legally be termed 'treason'. Far too many people believe they derive their rights from the constitution, a fallacy that is consistently aired in the mainstream media as well as in the alternative media as fact. For the handful of people left in America the constitution has no application whatsoever. It's a contract that applies only to those who sign up or swear oaths to it.

I'm sure that the legislation the Senate has passed begins with the usual statement that 'all persons' who... As no act can be impose which doesn't define terms, the definition of person is the usual legal subterfuge which implies that 'persons' are this, this or the other. No lawyer will take that definition and clarify that the people are not persons unless and until they contract with the government. The United States is not the united States of America. It is a corporation which can only wield power over those who contract into the corporate system. It is all a legal fiction.

A person may well be people but not all the people are persons. Of course, should you be presumed to be a person and they haul you away they now have the means to keep you out of the courts to challenge the corporate jurisdiction of the United States Inc. by refuting the presumption that you are a person. I suppose all one can do is deny being a person if incarcerated but undoubtedly that will get you a hole in the back of the head. This legislation is twisted and perverse and a clear indication that the sovereignty of the people is not to be tolerated.

The united States of America, the Republic, the true nation, is close to being no more.
Suspend all belief. Get the facts ~ Rudi
No one rules if no one obeys ~ Lao Tzu

Offline Ajax

  • Lieutenant Major
  • *
  • Posts: 1196
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2011, 09:20:26 AM »
Those words bear repeating. Over and over.

The sad fact is that the people have chosen to become 14th amendment citizens and thus become subjects of the federal government. To then go against the government can legally be termed 'treason'. Far too many people believe they derive their rights from the constitution, a fallacy that is consistently aired in the mainstream media as well as in the alternative media as fact. For the handful of people left in America the constitution has no application whatsoever. It's a contract that applies only to those who sign up or swear oaths to it.

I'm sure that the legislation the Senate has passed begins with the usual statement that 'all persons' who... As no act can be impose which doesn't define terms, the definition of person is the usual legal subterfuge which implies that 'persons' are this, this or the other. No lawyer will take that definition and clarify that the people are not persons unless and until they contract with the government. The United States is not the united States of America. It is a corporation which can only wield power over those who contract into the corporate system. It is all a legal fiction.

A person may well be people but not all the people are persons. Of course, should you be presumed to be a person and they haul you away they now have the means to keep you out of the courts to challenge the corporate jurisdiction of the United States Inc. by refuting the presumption that you are a person. I suppose all one can do is deny being a person if incarcerated but undoubtedly that will get you a hole in the back of the head. This legislation is twisted and perverse and a clear indication that the sovereignty of the people is not to be tolerated.

The united States of America, the Republic, the true nation, is close to being no more.
Agreed.

Are Americans in Line for Gitmo?
Ray McGovern.

December 3, 2011

Ambiguous but alarming new wording, which is tucked into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and was just passed by the Senate, is reminiscent of the "extraordinary measures" introduced by the Nazis after they took power in 1933.

And the relative lack of reaction so far calls to mind the oddly calm indifference with which most Germans watched the erosion of the rights that had been guaranteed by their own Constitution. As one German writer observed, "With sheepish submissiveness we watched it unfold, as if from a box at the theater."

The writer was Sebastian Haffner (real name Raimond Pretzel), a young German lawyer worried at what he saw in 1933 in Berlin, but helpless to stop it since, as he put it, the German people "collectively and limply collapsed, yielded and capitulated."

"The result of this millionfold nervous breakdown," wrote Haffner at the time, "is the unified nation, ready for anything, that is today the nightmare of the rest of the world." Not a happy analogy.

The Senate bill, in effect, revokes an 1878 law known as the Posse Comitatus Act, which banned the Army from domestic law enforcement after the military had been used —and often abused — in that role during Reconstruction. Ever since then, that law has been taken very seriously — until now. Military officers have had their careers brought to an abrupt halt by involving federal military assets in purely civilian criminal matters.

But that was before 9/11 and the mantra, "9/11 changed everything." In this case of the Senate-passed NDAA – more than a decade after the terror attacks and even as U.S. intelligence agencies say al-Qaeda is on the brink of defeat – Congress continues to carve away constitutional and legal protections in the name of fighting "terrorism."

Detainees at Guantanamo Bay in 2002

The Senate approved the expanded military authority despite opposition from Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and FBI Director Robert Mueller – and a veto threat from President Barack Obama.

The Senate voted to authorize – and generally to require – "the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons" indefinitely. And such "covered persons" are defined not just as someone implicated in the 9/11 attacks but anyone who "substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces."

Though the wording is itself torturous – and there is a provision for a waiver from the Defense Secretary regarding mandatory military detentions – the elasticity of words like "associated forces" and "supported" have left some civil libertarians worried that the U.S. military could be deployed domestically against people opposing future American wars against alleged "terrorists" or "terrorist states."

The Senate clearly wished for the military’s "law and order" powers to extend beyond the territory of military bases on the theory that there may be "terrorsymps" (short for "terrorist sympathizers") lurking everywhere.

Is the all-consuming ten-year-old struggle against terrorism rushing headlong to consume what’s left of our constitutional rights? Do I need to worry that the Army in which I was proud to serve during the 1960s may now kick down my front door and lead me off to indefinite detention — or worse?

My neighbors have noticed, after all, that I now wear a longish beard and, sometimes, even a hat like Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. And everyone knows what a terrorsymp he was. "If you see something, say something!"

Worse still, a few of my neighbors overheard me telling my grandchildren that President Obama should be ashamed to be bragging about having Awlaki, an American citizen, and later his 16 year-old son murdered without a whiff of due process. "If you hear something, say something!"

A Lost Respect

Citizens of powerful countries used to have their rights widely respected — at home and abroad. "I am a Roman citizen"—"Civis Romanus Sum" – once counted for something. Even more respect tended to greet "I am an American" — because of our power abroad and our once famous adherence to a written Constitution at home.

Adherence? Lately not so much. Not since power-hungry politicians set out to exploit 9/11 so that "everything changed," including even the rights formerly guaranteed us by the Bill of Rights and the habeas corpus protection in the Constitution itself.

Awlaki’s is an interesting case in point. A Muslim whose moderating influence was sought after by the Washington Establishment in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, he became "radicalized" by our warring on his fellow Muslims. By noting that little-known fact, am I showing "support" for "al-Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces"? Will the U.S. military be obliged to target me, too?

"Not you, Grandpa," my grandchildren reassured me at Thanksgiving. "Even with the beard and the hat, you don’t really look very much like Awlaki, or like any kind of terrorsymp. You look different; and your light skin and American citizenship should suffice to keep you safe."

I agreed that I would probably be okay, even if I kept up my vocal criticism of what is happening. But, truth be told, I harbored doubts even on Thanksgiving. And that was before the Senate version of the defense appropriation bill passed last Thursday.

Civis Americanus Sum. Yes, I am. But does that really count for much today? It certainly offered no protection to Awlaki, or to his son. What’s to prevent one of my former colleagues at the military or the CIA — those I have roundly criticized for endorsing and cheering on the kidnappers, torturers and assassins in their employ — from adding me to the "kill-or-capture-but-preferably-kill list"?

What has been happening in this continuation of a seemingly endless "war on terror" – amid widespread public indifference – makes Richard Nixon’s "Enemies List" look like a board game. At least, the Nixon White House had a modicum of good sense not to flaunt its skirting the law and violating constitutional rights.

It is a safe bet that functionaries at the National Security Council are updating the kill-or-capture list even now, confident that President Obama will sign the Senate version of the bill into law once it gets predictably endorsed by the Republican-controlled House.

Then, what is to prevent NSC "counterterrorist" functionaries from summoning the go-to lawyers still ensconced in the Justice Department and asking them for help in navigating what appear to be deliberate ambiguities in the new bill’s language.

Backed by a John Yoo-style "legal justification," an order could be issued to "terminate" me, while reassuring my neighbors that, yes, just as you suspected, he was a terrorsymp. Or maybe they’ll simply order some troops from the 82nd Airborne at Fort Bragg, where I was stationed a half-century ago, to apprehend me and give me a free one-way ticket to Guantanamo.

After all, how bad could that be? Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld explained to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer in June 2005 that the detainees at Guantanamo were "living in the tropics. They’re well fed. They’ve got everything they could possibly want." And would Rumsfeld lie?

Early Obfuscation

From my erstwhile colleagues at CIA, there has been more mumbo-jumbo aimed at disguising what is really afoot. According to press reports, the CIA general counsel has already said, disingenuously:  "American citizens are not immune from being treated like an enemy if they take up arms against the United States."

But one does not need to "take up arms" in order to be labeled a "combatant," as the government is defining such terms. Awlaki didn’t take up arms; he was said to have provided "material support to terrorism" by his alleged – but unproven – encouragement of terrorist attacks on the United States. (Under the new NDAA, a similar fate could befall someone who advocates resistance to "coalition partners," like NATO countries or some corrupt governments that are U.S. allies, such as the Karzai regime in Afghanistan or the terror-linked government of Pakistan).

In the broad strokes of defining American "partners" and al-Qaeda/Taliban "associated forces," will Israel fall into the first group and Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah get lumped into the second?

Could material support be nothing more than providing financial support for the U.S. Boat to Gaza, which challenged the  Israeli embargo of Hamas-ruled Gaza? If creative lawyers for this or some future administration get busy, would the new NDAA provide authority for the military to detain such a U.S. citizen under the Law of War and transfer him or her to Guantanamo or elsewhere?

Conflicting legal interpretations of the bill are now more about whether military detentions would be mandatory or would the president still retain some discretion.

In sum, the wording appears to create a parallel military justice system that, theoretically, we are all subject to. All that would be needed is an allegation by someone that we assisted someone who in some way assisted someone else in some way. An actual terrorist act would not be needed – and neither would a trial by one’s peers as guaranteed by the Constitution to determine actual "guilt."

Should you be tempted to dismiss this as "liberal fear-mongering," take a look at this item from FoxNews.com with its gleeful headline: "Democrat-Controlled Senate Passes Constitution-Shredding Defense Authorization Bill":

"The bill would require military custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of Al Qaeda or its affiliates and involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. … The legislation also would give the government the authority to have the military hold an individual suspected of terrorism indefinitely, without a trial.

"'Since the bill puts military detention authority on steroids and makes it permanent, American citizens and others are at greater risk of being locked away by the military without charge or trial if this bill becomes law,’ said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union."

A key element in the Senate bill, like the House version, is to expand the original Authorization of the Use of Military Force Act (AUMF) of September 2001 so it no longer links exclusively to 9/11. This creates the kind of ambiguity that allows Sens. John McCain, R-Arizona, and Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, to claim that the bill’s stringent provisions do apply to U.S. citizens, as well as non-citizens.

In addition, the new wording adds "associated forces" (whatever that means) to the previous AUMF’s list of targets. The language of the AUMF of September 2001 was limited to "those nations, organizations, or persons he [the President] determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons."

Burning the Midnight Oil

It is a safe guess that the legal pharisees were burning the midnight oil, dissecting how the draft bill can say, on the one hand, that this or that provision does not apply to American citizens — but, oops, this other provision seems to allow them to be shipped off to Guantanamo, too.

Not being expert enough to do so, I happily leave it to them to parse the language, diagram the sentences, and do surgery on each jot and tittle. There will be a veritable feast for the legal beagles.

What speaks loudest to me is the fact that two key amendments did not pass. Senate Amendment 1125 would have limited the mandatory detention provision to persons captured abroad. And Amendment 1126 would have provided that the authority of the military to detain persons without trial until the end of hostilities would not apply to American citizens. Both amendments were voted down 45 to 55.

Though President Obama has objected to the Senate bill as going too far even by his "death-to-Awlaki" standard, a more troubling question is what might these new powers mean if, say, another terrorist attack hits the United States or if a more hard-line president comes to power.

Take, for example, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, one of the Republican presidential hopefuls. Before a stump speech in Manchester, New Hampshire, on Tuesday, Perry gave us a hint of what his policies, and maybe even his Cabinet, would look like.

Perry flew in none other than racial profiler par excellence, the sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, Joe Arpaio. No, I’m not kidding; Perry apparently saw this as a way to strengthen his "law and order" credentials (accent, of course, on "order").

As I sat in the audience, Arpaio’s arrival took me by surprise, so perhaps I can be forgiven for reflexively bellowing a prolonged boo, as Arpaio made his way slowly and carefully up to the lectern to warm up the crowd. Later it occurred to me that booing may be something that gets you on the chain gang in Maricopa County; Arpaio did not seem at all used to it, and he did not take it well.

Reaching the podium, he turned and demanded to know who was booing, so I stood up from my second-row-center seat and raised my hand high. Fortunately for me, he had none of his deputies along, and booing is apparently not yet banned at Town Hall meetings in New Hampshire. Only Arpaio seemed to pay much heed.

Although I knew enough about Arpaio to consider him fully deserving of a loud boo or two, I did not know the half of it. Let me treat you to some encomia from the sheriff’s own official Web site:

"Arpaio knows what the public wants, [and] has served them well by establishing several unique programs. Arpaio …  started the nation’s largest Tent City for convicted inmates. Two thousand convicted men and women serve their sentences in a canvas incarceration compound. It is a remarkable success story. …

"Of equal success and notoriety are his chain gangs, which contribute thousands of dollars of free labor to the community. The male chain gang, and the world’s first-ever female and juvenile chain gangs, clean streets, paint over graffiti, and bury the indigent in the county cemetery.

"Also impressive are the Sheriff’s get tough policies. For example, he banned smoking, coffee, movies, pornographic magazines, and unrestricted TV in all jails. He has the cheapest meals in the U.S. too. The average meal costs between 15 and 40 cents, and inmates are fed only twice daily, to cut the labor costs of meal delivery. He even stopped serving them salt and pepper to save tax payers $20,000 a year.

"Another program Arpaio is very well known for is the pink underwear he makes all inmates wear. Years ago, when the Sheriff learned that inmates were stealing jailhouse white boxers, Arpaio had all inmate underwear dyed pink for better inventory control. … Arpaio looks forward to many more years as Sheriff of Maricopa County."

Again, I am not making this up. You can check out the sheriff’s Web site for yourself for still more.

I have to concede that I find the last sentence about Arpaio’s future plans somewhat reassuring because if he plans to stay in Maricopa County, it means his policing policies would stay limited to a fairly small geographic area (although perhaps that’s not good news for the people of Maricopa County).

But things could be worse if a President Perry picked Arpaio to take over the Department of Justice and Attorney General Arpaio had a chance to incarcerate more of us in tent prisons. But Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder hasn’t exactly shown himself to be a great defender of constitutional rights either.

Perry Strutting His Stuff

Back in New Hampshire, after Arpaio provided a lackluster introduction, Perry took the stage, offering unctuous thank yous to Sheriff Joe. Perry then reminded us forcefully that he is a "law and order guy."

That resonated with me in an unusually personal way — so much so, that I missed some of his other by now notorious remarks, like his appeal for all those 21 or over (sic) to vote for him in the New Hampshire primary and those from 18 to 21 to work hard and look toward the day when they too can vote. (sic)

Still, the words "law and order" stuck in my mind. I thought under what law did Perry several months ago call on Attorney General Holder to prosecute me and the other passengers on the Audacity of Hope, the U.S. Boat to Gaza as it challenged Israel’s blockade?

Because Perry had been busy glad-handing folks off to the side when I rose to plead guilty to booing Arpaio, the governor didn’t see who it was. And, as luck would have it, he called on me for the first question of the Q & A:

"I’m Ray McGovern, and I thank you for coming here, Governor Perry. My question pertains to a letter that you wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder on the 28th of June of this year, and I quote: 'As governor of one of the largest states, I write to encourage you to aggressively prosecute those on the U.S. Boat to Gaza, who plan to interfere with Israel’s maritime blockade of Gaza.’

"You may not have been aware that, three days previous, the State Department spokeswoman was asked three times whether Israel’s maritime blockade of Gaza was legal and she refused to say the blockade was legal. I was one of those passengers on the U.S. Boat to Gaza, and with my co-passengers we were wondering what you, as the governor of Texas, a 'law and order’ person … under what law did you wish to prosecute my co-passengers and me?"

Perry turned his response into a commentary on how much he supports Israel — no matter what. Like all of his rivals for the Republican nomination (except Ron Paul, who generally refuses to play this craven game), Perry is not about to let anyone outdistance him in expressing unqualified support for Israel.  And so, he began:

"The issue was that … a … I am a very strong supporter of Israel. … I’ve made my point; I must stand with Israel. … I’m going to stand with Israel. … And you’re free to go stand with who you want to, Sir, … but I will be standing with Israel."

"No matter what?" I asked.  "No matter what" was his emphatic response that can be heard beneath a crescendo of applause from Perry supporters. [To watch the video of this encounter, click here.]

How Far Will It Go?

With the new language in the NDAA, it would appear that Gov. Perry and others might soon have all the law they need to stifle acts or words that give support to Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran or any other perceived threat to Israel, at least after Obama signs the legislation and some smart lawyers get to work on the definition of "associated forces."

Then, will the 82nd Airborne be sent to fetch me if I continue to write and speak what I believe to be the truth on issues like these? What will I be risking if I keep hammering home little known facts like the following, which seldom, if ever, find their way into the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM)?

–Israel itself helped to create Hamas in 1987 as a Muslim fundamentalist, divide-and-conquer counterweight to the secular Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

–The bulk of Hamas’s popular appeal — like that enjoyed by Hezbollah in Lebanon — stems not from the crude rockets fired toward Israel, but rather from the tangible help Hamas provides to oppressed Palestinians.

Is James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, now treading on thin ice? This is what Clapper included as a sort of afterthought at the end of his 34-page "Worldwide Threat Assessment" before the House Intelligence Committee on Feb. 10, 2011. (You guessed right; the FCM, for some reason, missed it):

"We see a growing proliferation of state and non-state actors providing medical assistance to reduce foreign disease threats to their own populations, garner influence with affected local populations, and project power regionally. … In some cases, countries use health to overtly counter Western influence, presenting challenges to allies and our policy interests abroad over the long run.

"In last year’s threat assessment, the Intelligence Community noted that extremists may take advantage of a government’s inability to meet the health needs of its population, highlighting that HAMAS’s and Hizballah’s provision of health and social services in the Palestinian Territories and Lebanon helped to legitimize those organizations as a political force.  This also has been the case with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt."

This, most assuredly, is not the Official Washington party line. Could the Director of National Intelligence himself be prosecuted by those who believe that any good word for those that Israel considers enemies — like Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran — is tantamount to "material support" for terrorism?

(I do hope readers were not shocked by the diabolically clever way these "terrorist" movements garner public support — by providing life-saving medical care, for example.)

–It was on that public-service record (and also because of wide awareness of flagrant corruption in the PLO), that Hamas won a key parliamentary election in January 2006, defeating the PLO-affiliated Fatah party. While the election results were not disputed, they were not what the U.S., Israel and Europe wanted. So the U.S. and the EU cut off financial assistance to Gaza.

–Confidential documents, corroborated by former U.S. officials, show that thereupon the White House had the CIA try in 2007, with the help of Fatah strongman Muhammad Dahlan, to defeat Hamas in a bloody civil war. That, too, did not go as expected. Hamas won handily, leaving it stronger than ever. [See "The Gaza Bombshell" by David Rose, in Vanity Fair, April 2008, for the entire sad story.]

–Israel and Egypt then imposed an economic blockade on Gaza eventually reducing virtually all Gazans to a bare subsistence level, with 45 percent unemployment.

–From Dec. 27, 2008, to Jan. 18, 2009, while President George W. Bush was a lame duck, Israel launched an armed attack on Gaza, killing about 1,400 Gazans compared to an Israeli death toll of 13. Israel’s stated aim was to stop rocket fire into Israel and block any arms deliveries to Gaza.

President-elect Barack Obama said nothing. His unconscionable silence at the slaughter should have told us at that early juncture that he, too, would feel so politically intimidated that he would mute any objections to Israeli behavior. Since then, he has retreated from even his mild objections to Israel’s expanded settlements on Palestinian lands.

Guilt by Association

The United States is widely seen as responsible for Israel’s aggressive behavior, which is hardly surprising. It is no secret that Israel enjoys financial assistance ($3 billion per year), military backing, and virtually unquestioned political support from Washington.

What is surprising, in the words of Salon.com commentator Glenn Greenwald, is "how our blind, endless enabling of Israeli actions fuels terrorism directed at the U.S.," and how it is taboo to point this out.

Take for example former CIA specialist on al-Qaeda, Michael Scheuer, who had the audacity to state on C-SPAN: "For anyone to say that our support for Israel doesn’t hurt us in the Muslim world … is to just defy reality."

The Likud Lobby got Scheuer fired from his job at the Jamestown Foundation think tank for his forthrightness, and the Israeli media condemned his C-SPAN remarks as "blatantly anti-Semitic." There can be a high price to pay for candor on this issue.

That is what those behind the noxious language in the NDAA seem to intend. Sens. Carl Levin and John McCain are said to be the driving force behind the new language. No one in the Senate or House has received more funding from donor institutions related to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) than Levin, a Michigan Democrat.

For his part, McCain loves to demonstrate his unquestioning support for Israel — no matter what. He has even called for the release of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, who is currently serving a life sentence for passing highly sensitive, highly damaging U.S. secrets to Israel.

A few weeks ago, McCain parroted Tel Aviv’s line on Iran alleged drive to acquire a nuclear weapon (for which U.S. intelligence sees no concrete evidence) and how that creates a "direct existential threat to the state of Israel." McCain added that Israel "may feel compelled to neutralize this threat."

Would it be risking running afoul of the language in the defense authorization bill to expose this rhetoric for what it is — rubbish — noxious rubbish that makes it easier for Israel to believe it will enjoy full U.S. support, no matter what, should Israeli leaders decide to attack Iran?

The supreme irony is that such an attack would probably bring on a major war, global economic collapse, and possibly the destruction of Israel itself. Oops, what was that sound at the door? What do you mean — the 82nd is on the front porch?

Sorry; gotta go. Send cards and letters. My wife will probably be told, in due course, where they’ve put me. My only hope now is that Rumsfeld, for once, was telling the truth about detainees having "everything they could possibly want" in that tropical resort named Guantanamo?

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. An Army officer and then CIA analyst for a total of 30 years, he now serves on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).Source

:: Article nr. 83631 sent on 04-dec-2011 13:04 ECT

www.uruknet.info?p=83631
"There is no longer any room for hope"

Offline E_T

  • Lieutenant Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1580
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2011, 02:33:05 PM »
Thanks, Rudi.

Ajax, and Laconas.... missed you guys.   WWIII.... been holding my breath... : ((
Rest satisfied with doing well, and leave others to talk of you as they will.
Pythagoras (BC 582-BC 507) Greek philosopher

Offline laconas

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 13653
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2011, 03:28:25 PM »
Thanks, Rudi.

Ajax, and Laconas.... missed you guys.   WWIII.... been holding my breath... : ((

WWII is coming.
Nobody censors what they agree with

Offline Ajax

  • Lieutenant Major
  • *
  • Posts: 1196
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2011, 09:04:44 AM »
Thanks, Rudi.

Ajax, and Laconas.... missed you guys.   WWIII.... been holding my breath... : ((

Hello E_T, it is good to hear from you.
"There is no longer any room for hope"