David Seaman of Business Insider writes: "NDAA Set To Become Law: The Terror Is Nearer Than Ever"
53 replies, posted
[QUOTE][I][B]American Democracy: 1776-2011.
[/B][/I]It turns out that destroying the American democratic republic was easy to accomplish, historians will write someday. Simply get the three major cable news networks to blather on about useless bull**** for a few days, while legislators meet in secret [I]behind closed doors[/I] to rush through the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), and its evil twin sister, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which is a clever name for an Internet censorship bill straight out of an Orwellian nightmare.
Sure, some independent media web sites and [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/jon-stewart"]Jon Stewart[/URL] warned us about this. [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/ron-paul"]Ron Paul[/URL] & Son warned us about this. Amnesty International and the ACLU have been screaming from the rooftops, crying bloody murder. But the American people let it happen, because the vast majority of us simply didn't find out in time.
And now President Obama's advisers are saying he is withdrawing his veto threat against NDAA, so it will become law.
As will SOPA, since it is becoming ever more apparent that our "elected officials" in Congress are not satisfied with their 9% approval rating. They want a 0% approval rating.
I have no idea why Congress is pushing through anti-American legislation that is not only incompetent, but openly belligerent.
I have no idea why an American media blackout on NDAA is still in effect -- [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/anderson-cooper"]Anderson Cooper[/URL], Chris Matthews, [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/bill-oreilly"]Bill O'Reilly[/URL] and the other broadcast "journalists" have been disgustingly silent on what is undoubtedly the most important news story of the past decade. The single most important news story since September 11th, 2001.
[B]
Combined, NDAA and SOPA simply [I]destroy[/I] American democracy.[/B] That isn't hype. That isn't exaggeration. Within a few days, your freedom of speech will be gone -- post something controversial online, and the government can legally "disappear" it.
Annoy the government too much, or criticize Congress' infinite wisdom and mercy, and you may find yourself in military prison for the remainder of your life, without access to a trial or attorney. Even if you're an American citizen on US soil.
This is a brave new world. Watch what you say. Be mindful of who you associate with. You may criticize your government within the privacy of your own home, amongst close family or friends, but do not post negative comments online. Do not assemble. Do not protest. Do not agitate. Do not give "comfort" to the "enemy."
This is a sad day for all of us. All of our military spending, all of our fortresses and moats, and it turns out democracy was [I]attacked from within[/I], the historians will write someday. We didn't even see it coming.
[I]
I don't write articles every day, but when I do, they are on subjects you should know about. You can [B][URL="http://www.google.com/profiles/dseaman"]follow me on Google+[/URL][/B] to see my newest posts and keep in touch.[/I]
[/QUOTE]
Source: [url]http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-set-to-become-law-the-terror-is-nearer-than-ever-2011-12[/url]
I don't know about you guys, but I am now more afraid of my government, more than ever.
God damnit. *packs bags for Austria*
[QUOTE=Ownederd;33727502]Combined, NDAA and SOPA simply destroy American democracy. That isn't hype. That isn't exaggeration.[/QUOTE]
Yes it is. I can add Business insider to my list of bullshit news organizations. Also, I like Seaman ends it on a Dos Equis commercial reference. Show the caliber of journalist we're dealing with.
[QUOTE=Spooter;33727682]Yes it is. I can add Business insider to my list of bullshit news organizations. Also, I like Seaman ends it on a Dos Equis commercial reference. Show the caliber of journalist we're dealing with.[/QUOTE]
who fucking cares SOPA is serious shit and action must be taken against it
Heh, Seaman.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;33727712]who fucking cares SOPA is serious shit and action must be taken against it[/QUOTE]
Oh no, I agree, SOPA is indeed wretched. But that doesn't change the fact that this article is a sensationalist pile of shit.
[quote]Within a few days, your freedom of speech will be gone -- post something controversial online, and the government can legally "disappear" it.[/quote]
Just because they can doesn't mean they will. People said this about the DMCA and the worst that happened was copyright holders abused the legal system to financially ruin grandmas who don't even know what bittorrent is.
That being said it is still a stupid fucking law and it gives even more power for corporate entities to dictate what we can and can't do on the internet, and it needs to be stopped.
The NDAA needs to go too, because giving the government unlimited authority to imprison anyone, anywhere, for any reason is NOT supposed to happen.
Is there any room in Canada?
[quote]And now President Obama's advisers are saying he is withdrawing his veto threat against NDAA, so it will become law.[/quote]
Way to pre-emptively lose an election, bumblefuck
The government really needs to stop fucking with the internet.
We already covered what the NDAA is and what it isn't, what it does and what it doesn't do, why the hype around it is horse shit, and why it constitutes (at worst) an impotent version of the Patriot Act.
God fucking dammit.
Now SOPA? That's another story that needs to be taken seriously.
This NDAA act scares the fucking shit out of me. It has gotten NO press coverage whatsoever. SOPA is also absolutely terrifying to me. I'm worried about where this country is going.
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;33727984]We already covered what the NDAA is and what it isn't, what it does and what it doesn't do, why the hype around it is horse shit, and why it constitutes (at worst) an impotent version of the Patriot Act.
God fucking dammit.
Now SOPA? That's another story that needs to be taken seriously.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being[/url]
[quote]UPDATE I: Don’t be confused by anyone claiming that the indefinite detention legislation does not apply to American citizens. It does. There is an exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032 of the bill), but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1031 of the bill). So, the result is that, under the bill, the military has the power to indefinitely imprison American citizens, but it does not have to use its power unless ordered to do so.
But you don’t have to believe us. Instead, read what one of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Lindsey Graham said about it on the Senate floor: “1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”
There you have it — indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial. And the Senate is likely to vote on it Monday or Tuesday.[/quote]
hmmmm who am i going to trust a legal organization and the sponsor of the bill or some random facepunch posters hmmmm
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33727865]Way to pre-emptively lose an election, bumblefuck[/QUOTE]
But now who do we vote for?!
[QUOTE=Javascript;33728095]This NDAA act scares the fucking shit out of me. It has gotten NO press coverage whatsoever. SOPA is also absolutely terrifying to me. I'm worried about where this country is going.[/QUOTE]
It's gotten no press coverage because for once the news media is being smart, they read through the bill and saw it won't affect any legal American citizen and don't want to cause a mass panic by pretending it does. SOPA everyone despises, theres a huge petition to throw it out, Obama has even threatened a veto.
[editline]14th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=abananapeel;33728224]But now who do we vote for?![/QUOTE]
Gingrich? He voted against the first internet censorship bill.
[QUOTE=abananapeel;33728224]But now who do we vote for?![/QUOTE]
Ron Paul
[QUOTE=Lazor;33728140][url]http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being[/url]
hmmmm who am i going to trust a legal organization and the sponsor of the bill or some random facepunch posters hmmmm[/QUOTE]
ACLU is part of the feminist liberal homosexual agenda.
[editline]14th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Techno-Man;33728324]Ron Paul[/QUOTE]
No, that's stupid. Vote for [i]different congressmen.[/i]
Seriously. A complete reversal of congress. Vote out nearly every incumbent.
[quote]they read through the bill and saw it won't affect any legal American citizen[/quote]
wrong
REX 84.
[video=youtube;hG_R6U_Ffes]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG_R6U_Ffes[/video]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84[/url]
[quote]Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was a secretive "scenario and drill" developed by the United States federal government to suspend the United States Constitution, declare martial law, place military commanders in charge of state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens who are deemed to be "national security threats", in the event that the President declares a "State of Domestic National Emergency". The plan states that events that might cause such a declaration would be widespread U.S. opposition to a U.S. military invasion abroad, such as if the United States were to directly invade Central America.[1][2][3][4][5][6] To combat what the government perceived as "subversive activities", the plan also authorized the military to direct ordered movements of civilian populations at state and regional levels.[7]
Rex 84 was written by Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North, who was both National Security Council White House Aide, and NSC liaison to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and John Brinkerhoff, the deputy director of "national preparedness" programs for FEMA. They patterned the plan on a 1970 report written by FEMA chief Louis Giuffrida, at the Army War College, which proposed the detention of up to 21 million "American Negroes", if there were a black militant uprising in the United States.[1][8] Existence of a master military contingency plan (of which REX-84 was a part), "Garden Plot" and a similar earlier exercise, "Lantern Spike" were originally revealed by journalist Ron Ridenhour, who summarized his findings in an article in CounterSpy.[9]
Transcripts from the Iran-Contra Hearings in 1987 record the following dialogue between Congressman Jack Brooks, Oliver North's attorney Brendan Sullivan and Senator Daniel Inouye, the Democratic Chair of the joint Senate-House Committee:[10]
[Congressman Jack] Brooks: Colonel North, in your work at the N.S.C. were you not assigned, at one time, to work on plans for the continuity of government in the event of a major disaster?
Brendan Sullivan [North's counsel, agitatedly]: Mr. Chairman?
[Senator Daniel] Inouye: I believe that question touches upon a highly sensitive and classified area so may I request that you not touch upon that?
Brooks: I was particularly concerned, Mr. Chairman, because I read in Miami papers, and several others, that there had been a plan developed, by that same agency, a contingency plan in the event of emergency, that would suspend the American constitution. And I was deeply concerned about it and wondered if that was an area in which he had worked. I believe that it was and I wanted to get his confirmation.
Inouye: May I most respectfully request that that matter not be touched upon at this stage. If we wish to get into this, I'm certain arrangements can be made for an executive session.
Exercises similar to Rex 84 happen regularly.[11] For example, from 1967 to 1971 the FBI kept a list of over 100,000 persons to be rounded up as subversive, dubbed the "ADEX" list.[12]
The basic facts about Rex 84 and other contingency planning readiness exercises—and the potential threat they pose to civil liberties if fully implemented in a real operation—are taken seriously by scholars and civil libertarians.[13][broken citation][/quote]
[/quote]
[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;33728794]REX 84.
[video=youtube;hG_R6U_Ffes]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG_R6U_Ffes[/video]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84[/url]
[/quote]
Uhh that's about martial law
[QUOTE=Lazor;33728140][url]http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being[/url]
hmmmm who am i going to trust a legal organization and the sponsor of the bill or some random facepunch posters hmmmm[/QUOTE]
God damnit. God [B]damnit.[/B] You're right. I just read through the bill, and I managed to get through the convoluted wording. It DOES apply to U.S. citizens!
God [B]damnit.[/B]
Now note, section 1031 does state that the indefinite detention only applies to people who've been linked to Al-Qaeda or other groups who are actively at war with us. Now yes, the government could technically have the military throw away anyone they wanted and claim Al-Qaeda ties, but I don't think that's the point of this bill at all.
Hear me out.
Remember the case of that Yemeni Cleric? He was, by birth, a U.S. citizen. However, he played a significant role in recruitment and organization for Al-Qaeda, so he was killed in a drone strike. Now, the legality of this was immediately put into question, and I think, in a way, that this bill is part of a response to that. This bill wants to make clear that U.S. citizens, if aiding groups of active belligerents, are open to the legal status of other active belligerents.
Now obviously the bill goes waaaay too far and grants far too much power. However, I don't think it's intended to be an attempt at creating a police state in the U.S., though it helps further create the potential for one. I don't think it was deliberately engineered to stomp on the rights of Americans, just the rights of terrorists. It's just stupidly and thoughtlessly written. Other than, of course, the cynical ploy of adding those two clauses to section 1032.
Btw, off topic, but is anyone else kinda pissed that the Christianity vs. Atheism thread is getting way more attention than this?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33728342]
No, that's stupid. Vote for [i]different congressmen.[/i]
Seriously. A complete reversal of congress. Vote out nearly every incumbent.[/QUOTE]
If only informative ideals could perform extreme positive changes in the U.S. Still, I support influence that could uphold democracy and liberty. Since I'm here unable to move easily to another country, for my family and others I will help someway for a better future..
Well, this only solidifies the de facto state of affairs since 9/11. The executive branch has claimed the power to indefinitely disappear people for a decade. Now it's legal.
We elected Obama for change, and that's exactly what he's done. He's changed the country to it's most terrifying state yet. With these two bills I am now legitimately afraid of my government.
Whatever respect I had for Obama, I no longer have. I expected he would at least have the common decency to veto something as catastrophic to liberty as this.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33729094]Whatever respect I had for Obama, I no longer have. I expected he would at least have the common decency to veto something as catastrophic to liberty as this.[/QUOTE]
If he doesn't veto it I think most liberals will agree with you
[U]OH SHIT.[/U]
Someone on /k/ says it's been passed, but I'm not seeing mention of it on ANY news network's website.
Any confirmation?
[QUOTE=Ridge;33729223]Someone on /k/ says it's been passed, but I'm not seeing mention of it on ANY news network's website.
Any confirmation?[/QUOTE]
Reddit isn't exploding so nope.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.