This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Congress Proposes Bill to Allow Worldwide War ... Including INSIDE the U.S.
Americans who have been paying attention are outraged that Bush lied us into Iraq by making up false claims about weapons of mass destruction and pretending that Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11.
Many are disgusted that Obama got us into a war in Libya without Congressional authorization.
But as the ACLU noted
yesterday, Congress is going even further ... proposing handing
permanent, world-wide war-making powers to the president - including the
ability to make war within the United States:
A hugely important provision for Congress to authorize a new worldwide war has been tucked away inside the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The bill was marked up by members of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) last Wednesday that poured into Thursday morning (2:45 a.m. to be exact).
A couple of minutes past midnight, Rep. John Garamendi
(D-Calif.) offered an amendment to strike Sec. 1034 — the new
authorization for worldwide war provision — from the NDAA. Visibly
angry that such a large sweeping provision had not yet had any public
hearing whatsoever, he vigorously characterized it as a very broad
declaration of war.
Rep. Garamendi was very concerned by the
limitless geographic boundaries of the provision. Essentially, it
would enable the U.S. to use military force anywhere in the world (including within the U.S.) in search of terrorists.
***
While
a new authorization for worldwide war has had its first public
debate, it unfortunately only lasted a hair over 10 minutes and
occurred after midnight.
Though it is a very troubling expansion
of war authority, it has been lingering for more than three years as a
“sleeper provision,” and it is finally getting the attention of some
members of Congress. We hope that further debate in Congress in the
weeks ahead will allow for a more in-depth examination of unchecked
authority to wage worldwide war, and what the outcomes of such a
provision will yield.
As I noted in 2008:
An article in the Army Times reveals that the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team will be redeployed from Iraq to domestic operations within the United States.
The
unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the
Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports
this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a
dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit
may be called upon to help with "civil unrest" and "crowd control".
The soldiers are learning to use so-called "nonlethal weapons" designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.
This violates posse comitatus and the Constitution. But, hey, we're in a "national emergency", so who cares, right?
(We're still in a declared state of national emergency).
I noted a couple of months later:
Everyone knows that deploying 20,000 troops on U.S. soil violates Posse Comitatus and the Constitution.
And everyone understands that staging troops within the U.S. to "help out with civil unrest and crowd control" increases the danger of overt martial law.
But no one is asking an obvious question: Does the government's own excuse for deploying the troops make any sense?
Other Encroachments On Civil Rights Under Obama
As bad as Bush was, the truth is that, in many ways, freedom and constitutional rights are under attack even more than during the Bush years.
Obama has presided over the most draconian crackdown on leaks in our history -- even more so than Nixon.
As Marjorie Cohen - professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and past president of the National Lawyers Guild - writes at the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy:
Army
Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is facing court-martial for leaking
military reports and diplomatic cables to WikiLeaks, is being held in
solitary confinement in Quantico brig in Virginia. Each night, he is
forced to strip naked and sleep in a gown made of coarse material. He
has been made to stand naked in the morning as other inmates walked by
and looked. As journalist Lance Tapley documents in his chapter on
torture in the supermax prisons in The United States and Torture,
solitary confinement can lead to hallucinations and suicide; it is
considered to be torture. Manning's forced nudity amounts to
humiliating and degrading treatment, in violation of U.S. and
international law.
Nevertheless, President Barack Obama
defended Manning's treatment, saying, "I've actually asked the
Pentagon whether or not the procedures . . . are appropriate. They
assured me they are." Obama's deference is reminiscent of President
George W. Bush, who asked "the most senior legal officers in the U.S.
government" to review the interrogation techniques. "They assured me
they did not constitute torture," Bush said.
***
After State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley criticized Manning's
conditions of confinement, the White House forced him to resign.
Crowley had said the restrictions were "ridiculous, counterproductive
and stupid." It appears that Washington is more intent on sending a
message to would-be whistleblowers than on upholding the laws that
prohibit torture and abuse.
***
Torture is
commonplace in countries strongly allied with the United States. Vice
President Omar Suleiman, Egypt's intelligence chief, was the
lynchpin for Egyptian torture when the CIA sent prisoners to Egypt in
its extraordinary rendition program. A former CIA agent observed, "If
you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If
you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want
someone to disappear - never to see them again - you send them to
Egypt." In her chapter in The United States and Torture, New Yorker journalist Jane Mayer cites Egypt as the most common destination for suspects rendered by the United States.
As I pointed out in March:
Former
constitutional law teacher Glenn Greenwald says that - in his defense
of state secrecy, illegal spying, preventative detention, harassment
of whistleblowers and other issues of civil liberties - Obama is even
worse than Bush.
Indeed, Obama has authorized "targeted assassinations" against U.S. citizens. Even Bush didn't openly do something so abhorrent to the rule of law.
Obama is trying to expand spying well beyond the Bush administration's programs. Indeed, the Obama administration is arguing that citizens should never be able to sue the government for illegal spying.
Obama's indefinite detention policy is an Orwellian nightmare, which will create more terrorists.
Furthermore
- as hard as it is for Democrats to believe - the disinformation and
propaganda campaigns launched by Bush have only increased under Obama. See this and this.
And as I pointed out last year:
According to Department of Defense training manuals, protest is considered "low-level terrorism". And see this, this and this.
An FBI memo also labels peace protesters as "terrorists".
***
A 2003 FBI memo describes protesters' use of videotaping as an "intimidation" technique, even though - as the ACLU
points out - "Most mainstream demonstrators often use videotape
during protests to document law enforcement activity and, more
importantly, deter police from acting outside the law." The FBI
appears to be objecting to the use of cameras to document unlawful
behavior by law enforcement itself.
The Internet has been labeled
as a breeding ground for terrorists, with anyone who questions the
government's versions of history being especially equated with
terrorists.
Government agencies such as FEMA are allegedly teaching that the Founding Fathers should be considered terrorists.
The government is also using anti-terrorism laws to keep people from learning what pollutants are in their own community. See this, this, this and this.
Claims of "national security"
are also used to keep basic financial information - such as who got
bailout money - secret. That might not bode for particularly warm and
friendly treatment for someone persistently demanding the release of
such information.
The state of Missouri tried to label
as terrorists current Congressman Ron Paul and his supporters, former
Congressman Bob Barr, libertarians in general, anyone who holds gold,
and a host of other people.
And according to a law school professor and former president of the National Lawyers Guild, pursuant to the Military Commissions Act:
Anyone who ... speaks out against the government's policies could be declared an "unlawful enemy combatant" and imprisoned indefinitely. That includes American citizens.
Obama has refused to reverse these practices.
»
- advertisements -
I can't believe that over 50% of the population bought the load of crap he was reading off the teleprompter. After a lifetime of doing nothing and reading a few speeches, he became The Messiah.
REVOLT! MARCH ON WASHINGTON! I BEG YOU! IT IS OUR LAST CHANCE FOR FREEDOM! VIVA LA REV!
I don't want to take over the system, or even to change it.
I just want to avoid it.
That will not be possible.
Yup, not possible now, if they REALLY want to find you.
Yup. You are born and you die. Try to have fun and not get assassinated by your government along the way.
Word, I have come around to this perspective.
And where are the filibusters? There are no filibusters because there are no good politicians! You hear me? None! We the people must stand up against the system! Against the politicians! We the people must stand up! We are who we have been waiting for!
There's no filibuster in the House, Dumb Ass. All spending bills must originate in the house. Get yourself a Constitution and try learning it. You will be light years ahead of the US Senate and this President. And no, it still won't matter, there's real power in the balance and they don't mean yours.
Chuck the civics prof!!!!! What a full of himself X%^&^$^&*())*&^%$%^&*()_
And this is a surprise why?
GW...you could sooner get a Walrus to do calculus than get Americans interested in such matters.
This country will die of apathy and mental atrophy.
Secession Bitchez! Texas and the Confederate States will succeed when the Dollar dies.
Here's where diehard Americans are going.
http://www.survivalblog.com/redoubt.html
Since when are die-hard Americans xenophobic monotheists?
And when that author states: "I do not, nor have I ever advocated asking anyone already living here to leave, nor would I deny anyone's right to move here, regardless of their faith,"
my first tought was 'who the fuck do you think you are to think that you have any power or authority, to deny or permit any free person anything?.
Look up the definition of advocate and try again
great idea...let's all concentrate ourselves into a remote area where we can be more easily hunted down and wiped out by far superior technology. The best shepherds train the sheep to round themselves up.
No.
There is no actual visible defensive line in this battle. The closest things to a defensive line are gold, silver, and supplies.
Yet I argue that the front line is awareness.
Agreed, a concentration is a worthless tactic. Easier to be in the general population and avoid that retarded idea of a stand off. If you want thing to fall down, easier to bit away at the base of it.
yep, and finally, they'll be able to secure their borders.
GW, you're not just now figuring out that both parties are just flip sides of the same coin, are you? People argue endlessly about which party is 'better' or 'worse', but really they suck pretty near equally, just in different ways. If the media would report the foibles of both sides equally, I guess it would become that much more obvious. Neither, if given free reign, would impact the US and it citizens in a long-term positive manner. And, there is the question of whether the president and congressional leaders are really working for 'we the people' or are just puppets for banksters and other criminal types...........
Both parties are Unconstitutionalists, but one is definitely worse.
Bullshit!
They merely polarize their lies so that one side seems scarier than the other, depending upon which set of lies mean more to you personally. The fact that you fell for it, displays just how well it works, no?
In short, take your moral relativism and shove it. You've been had, and are an unwitting tool of the elite. As long as you take a side, you are one of them.
What is so hard to understand about the concept, "There is no such thing as a necessary evil, but only evil."?
+ 2sides of the same "heads I win, tails you lose" coin.
If you are responding to me, how are you dealing with the Elite?
Are you doing nothing, boycotting stuff, breaking stuff.
The rate of change, wrt, constitutional rights is increasing and I don't like where my tax money is going. Change!
Everything is relative and you don't know how I vote.
....and I still haven't made up my mind whcih one.
John Garimendi is a democrat who carpet bagged a district where he did not live in California in order to support Obama. He was the former Insurance Commissioner of California, and I must say the only one with integrity and fairness. His residence is in Calaveras County (and he has one in Stockton-San Joaquin County next door). I think his new district is in the bay area or northern Sacramento.
That he would ear marked this bill kind of makes me proud, as I voted for him many times, and always respected him greatly. Actually, I feel a little vindicated in my belief that there might be a few elected representatives still left out there with some integrity and decency (our Topeka, Ks one surely is not one of those).
What really pleases me is that he has surely pissed our Affirmative Action President off greatly. Maybe other democrats and republicans will follow suit.
John Garimendi is a democrat who carpet bagged a district where he did not live in California in order to support Obama. He was the former Insurance Commissioner of California, and I must say the only one with integrity and fairness. His residence is in Calaveras County (and he has one in Stockton-San Joaquin County next door). I think his new district is in the bay area or northern Sacramento.
That he would ear marked this bill kind of makes me proud, as I voted for him many times, and always respected him greatly. Actually, I feel a little vindicated in my belief that there might be a few elected representatives still left out there with some integrity and decency (our Topeka, Ks one surely is not one of those).
What really pleases me is that he has surely pissed our Affirmative Action President off greatly. Maybe other democrats and republicans will follow suit.
the oath is to the Constitution "and all enemies foreign and domestic" relative to that. I know of no oath to the President or any member of Congress either.
I could be wrong, happens rarely....., but I think the Marine Corp. is the one branch that does take an oath to the president? Or, at least their oth is different than the other branches?
Must be some USMC vets out there that know the answer.
are Florida golf courses threatened????
yes, with poop.
No, they take the same oath as every other service member:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces_oath_of_enlistment
Some people get hung up on the 'obey orders of the President' part. Anyone with half a brain, and this is reinforced by (very brief) training, knows that a soldier must NOT obey an illegal order. This could put service members and officers on a very slippery slope.
Indeed vet....nor to a government.
That's why they'll use NATO troops once things get really ugly.
Chinese troops would be cheaper and less likely to balk at orders of disarming civilians...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RenRILqwhJs
Another step (along with many since 2001) in un-arming the American population. Again, things just keep getting more and more interesting. Think about it, we have many weapons at our disposal. Hedge accordingly.
..... praying to the white jesus MF-ers.
Would it make you feel better if dem blue-eyed debbilz prayed to black jeebus motherfuckers? We'll rip down the white Jeebus and put up black jeebus so you limp-wristed cocksuckers won't be so offended
+1 lol
Unarming Americans?
You mean SOUTH Americans? WTF? Get off the crack (Faux news) and look around.
America is full of paranoid, genetically impaired MF'ers. Gonna have to build a wall all right... to keep people in. Crazy, gun toting, praying to the white jesus MF-ers.
when the time comes we will gut these fuckers and then take out 1.2 billion bastards from the evil religion of peace......we have more guns and a bigger army.....
Da revvvvvvvvvvvrend Jaramayuh Right seyz jeebus is black. Dem Faux Noooz watchin crackaz beez crayzee n sheeet mofo
Damn!!!...that's funny shit right there!...ROTFL!!!
Gun toting........what WOULD you have them toting? Magic ferry dust and daisies?
What a putz
A policeman is too heavy to carry, hence the C C W
What are you talking about? think deeper. The weapons I speak of are not conventional. God died a long time ago, who gives a flying fuck about bible thumpers, they are a non-threat to anyone but themselves.
"God died a long time ago" Proof please? And not some Time cover pic or atheist's opinion. Empirical evidence will suffice.
So you're one of these guys?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNN1DCO0RgU
since 2001? wtf, remember 1994? Why do you think Clinton became a 'conservative' and backed off un-arming Americans? 1968? 1934? Trust me, as power flowed to the centralized federal government, they have been planning and trying to un-arm the American citizenry.