RSN August 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Hedges writes: "It is about protecting the state from us. That is why no one in the executive or legislative branch is going to restore our rights. The new version of the NDAA, like the old ones, provides our masters with the legal shackles to make our resistance impossible. And that is their intention."

Justice Shackled. (photo: ACLU)
Justice Shackled. (photo: ACLU)

go to original article

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
-49 # grandone@charter.net 2012-12-25 11:13
Yes, yes, yes, I've heard it all before from the conspiracy theorists and gun nuts. "The gummint is a comin' to get ya" that is the justification for the assault weapons they hold or buy. The way the NRA twisted Thomas Jefferson's reasoning for the right to keep and bear arms (a 180 degree turn away from the intent of the Second Amendment) is the same being used to scare people into fearing the government because of NDAA. The government, which - to the best of my knowlege - is at war with the Taliban and Al Queda, is doing what is necessary to protect us from domestic flavors of same on our soil. To turn that on its head and make it a Government v. Citizens' Rights is preposterous. It denigrates the record of service of those who died or were wounded in Afghanistan and other conflagrations in the war on terror. Does Mr. Hedges want us to believe that the Supreme Court of the United States would allow such a policy of kidnapping American citizens to stand? "The gummint is a comin' to get ya!"... Right.
 
 
-21 # WestWinds 2012-12-25 12:10
>>>Does Mr. Hedges want us to believe that the Supreme Court of the United States would allow such a policy of kidnapping American citizens to stand?
 
 
+21 # RHytonen 2012-12-25 13:26
Congress wouldn't have passed it, and the President wouldn't sign it, unless they knew they indeed will.

The SCOTUS is even more corporatist than congress.
 
 
+8 # 666 2012-12-26 14:45
the US govt has basically lost its constitutional and moral legitimacy.
 
 
+9 # wantrealdemocracy 2012-12-25 22:30
No one is denigrating the soldiers who died or were wounded in the illegal wars of aggression by the United States. Those mislead young people thought they were protecting their families but they were as badly informed as grandone. But he (and I assume grandone is a man)is correct when he says (in his attempt at humor), "The gummint is a comin' to get ya!" They are. Our civil rights are gone. Ben Franklin said when you give up your rights for security you end up with neither.
 
 
+42 # Glen 2012-12-25 12:12
So grandone, how do you excuse the use of this policy on U.S. citizens? How do you excuse the use of drones over U.S. soil, against citizens? How do you excuse the Patriot Act? Wanton surveillance on citizens? How about the increasing militarization of police forces and how they have been illegally used against citizens merely expressing their First Amendment rights?

Take a close look and you will see that it isn't anyone in the Middle East these policies apply to. It is U.S. citizens.
 
 
+16 # Skeptical1247 2012-12-25 12:52
In the realm of karma and irony, would it not be hysterically funny if our military detained and permanently disappeared every jackass that voted for this abomination, and then called for a special election, publicly funded, to replace them all.... the cherry on top would be replacing every corrupt justice in the Supreme Court. It would be the very best possible thing that could happen to this nation... Thanks, Santa....
 
 
+12 # Jack Gibson 2012-12-25 13:18
"If the Court of Appeals upholds Forrest’s ruling..."? Unfortunately, the Appeals Court will NOT uphold Forrest's ruling. You watch. If there were any real chance(s) of their upholding sanity, they wouldn't have granted the increasingly totalitarian government's motion for a temporary stay of the injunction. They prevented the government from being in contempt of court for already using the 2012 NDAA to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens. After all, the government already assassinates completely innocent sixteen year old American citizen boys whose only "crime" was going and looking for their already-assassi nated father who they hadn't seen in years (who they obviously didn't know had already been murdered by the U.S. government); so, since it does that, the government, including the courts under its control, will do everything in their increasingly unconstitutiona l power(s) to also indefinitely detain, without trial, anyone it deems fit to so detain, just as it deems fit to murder whoever it wishes to murder.

- Continued -
 
 
+9 # Jack Gibson 2012-12-25 14:20
And thus their lawlessness, or human-rights-vi olating actions under color of "lawfulness", are increasing by leaps and bounds; which therefore threatens the safety of all of us who non-violently stand up against such increasing totalitarianism ; for, in addition, we're already being falsely called "terrorists" and "unprivileged enemy belligerents", etc., by that government; so it's just a matter of time until they take action against all of us. Sadly, sanity will NOT prevail, but only madness.

Thus, the Mayans might as well have been right.
 
 
+12 # Vardoz 2012-12-25 13:45
All the pieces are being put in place and supported by a majortiy of reps we vote for who support an anti- Democratic police state. Indefinate detention, gigantic spy matrix, prisons for profit, thousands of killer and spy drones in our skies and killer robots in the field.
They will crush all decency, prosperity, humanity, rights, freedoms, you name it. They will threaten all of health, safety and welfare as they ravage our nation. We will all be held hostage in our prison nation. All this as they destroy the world, poison our food, water and air and oceans and make life totally miserable and perpetrate perhaps tens of thousands of deaths as we tumble into ever gowing poverty. What is the point? It will be a nightmare of a place to live with stagnant wages, less jobs and the cost of livng going through the roof. This is why shopping this xmas was already down 4.5%. And they are just getting started. Between the TPP and Fukushima, we don't have a prayer. George Carlin got it right a long time ago.
 
 
+1 # Johnny 2013-01-12 11:58
>
Problem is, even if there are candidates on the ballot who opposes totalitarianism , the totally controlled mass media make sure practically nobody ever hears of them.
 
 
+18 # brux 2012-12-25 14:04
I agree that US citizens should have been left out of this law, it only is going to tempt a bad government to abuse their power in the future.

I disagree with grandone above in that the government is efficient. It is so odd how people from this perspective hate and criticize anything the government does and the government per se as being incompetent, yet stand up and cheer for any crude argument to justify the military. If the government is so bad and "the problem not the solution" then how can it be trusted with using deadly force when there is no due process?

When we had a small well meaning group of people ... the founders ... working to build the best system it worked fairly well, but now that a corporatocracy runs things a mindset that is not voted on is behind propagandizing and brainwashing the country through the media - discriminating against those who pick up on the mindset and those who oppose it ... which should be their right.

We are halfway down the slippery slope to totalitarianism , and we, being the most technical country are now potentially the great threat to human freedom.
 
 
+18 # Chick Dante 2012-12-25 14:28
Limiting this unconstitutiona l detention law to "non-citizens" is a chimera. What prevents the government detaining me and claiming that I am not a citizen? Without a right of attainder or ha was corpus, such a limitation merely limits a cause of action or liability for civil damages should the family somehow discover proof of detention. But it would not fix the underlying basis for the evil and unconstitutiona lity in the detention policy. In addition, indefinite detention violates the Geneva Conventions which protect both combatants and non combatants, citizens and non- citizens alike. And with the extension of this"law" the US has broken away from the community of civilized nations and has lost the moral authority to complain about human rights abuses by anyone else.
 
 
-7 # MidwestTom 2012-12-25 21:10
The NDAA, brought to us by Obama. The only reason for the NDAA is the rapidly growing number of people who think that it is a religious act to blow oneself up, if by so doing you take infidels with you.
 
 
+6 # BradFromSalem 2012-12-26 08:07
MT,
The NDAA of 2012 did extend the authority of the government over its citizens and President Obama did encourage and support that extension of his authority.

But the mindset that brings into being such laws has long been part of America, back to the Alien & Sedition Acts. The mindset I am talking about is the one that tells us to be very afraid of the Muslims/Terrori sts/Hispanics/B lacks/Hippies/H omosexuals/Comm unists/Jews/Cat holics/Asians/A merican Indians/Witches.

This mindset is always controlled by the entrenched powers, it is this us vs. them mentality that is to blame. Right now the fear of Muslim Terrorists is strong, and Obama in his natural caution and desire to protect America has succumbed to mindset of fear. While the President is only the latest victim, he is hardly alone in the responsibility.
 
 
+3 # wrknight 2012-12-26 08:41
If you want to do something about this, track the voting record of your Representative and if he/she supported the NDAA in it's present form, vote for his/her opponent in 2014.
 
 
-1 # Rita Walpole Ague 2012-12-28 04:41
Wish 'twere that simple, wrknight. Reality check: Election fraud is well set into place, with no real McCoy investigation/p rosecution, with mandatory sentencing in place for any and all found guilty.

The moans in the room could be heard, as League of Women Voters members viewed the documentary, "The Uncounted", and listened to the wannabe testimony of the software consultant who was hired by the Greedy Old Partiers in Florida in 2000 to 'fix' the vote to be in favor of 'W', no duh.

Lots and lots we've gotta do, starting with assume nothing, starting with making certain that all can vote (any wrongful disenfranchisem ent must be considered unlawful and heavily penalized), and get immediate proof certain that each and every vote is honestly counted.

Oh how the villainaire rulers dread the thought that such 'everyone can vote, and each vote gets counted' day night come.
 
 
0 # Johnny 2013-01-12 12:02
How can voting impede totalitarianism when the only candidates on the ballot support totalitarianism ?
 
 
0 # Johnny 2013-01-12 12:00
Really? In your congressional district, who was the candidate on the ballot who opposed the NDAA?
 
 
0 # Johnny 2013-01-12 11:53
THIS IS MISLEADING. The truth is that he bill allows indefinite detention without charges or trial of ANYBODY.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN