NDAA HR3166 S1867 HR1540 Section 1031e – SEQUEL = STORM TROOPERS & SS = DHS FEMA TSA !!!

The Washington Examiner

byJoel Gehrke Commentary Staff Writer

President Obama’s State Department announced, during a press briefing today, the creation of the Bureau of Counterterrorism, which will coordinate with United States entities such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and foreign governments to develop civilian counterterrorism strategies and operations.

“The mission of the new bureau will be to lead the [State] Department in the U.S. Government’s effort to counter terrorism abroad and to secure the United States against foreign terrorist threats,” Ambassador Dan Benjamin told reporters. “The bureau will lead in supporting U.S. counterterrorism diplomacy and seek to strengthen homeland security, countering violent extremism, and build the capacity of partner nations to deal effectively with terrorism.”

The bureau has previously operated on a smaller scale as an office under Benjamin. The upgrade comes as Obama has enjoyed foreign policy success due to the killing of Osama bin Laden, but also faced criticism over a quick withdrawal from Iraq, increasing aggression from Iran, and for negotiating with the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. “I want to underscore we all know that there is no way to shoot our way out of this problem conclusively and forever,” Benjamin said today, “and that’s why strengthening our engagement with others to support their civilian institutions so that they can actually hold that territory, police that territory, try people who want to carry out violent attacks either against people who live there or abroad, is an absolutely vital undertaking.”

The bureau will focus on foreign terrorists, but their activities have some bearing on domestic security. It collaborates with “the Department of Homeland Security to work jointly to stop terrorist travel, to improve aviation security,” for instance, but will focus more on “the bilateral kind of diplomacy that we do with others on a number of different issues, whether it has to do with how we reduce the space that terrorist groups have to fundraise, [or] to operate,” Benjamin explained.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/obama-launches-bureau-counterterrorism/292831

HR3166 = New Bill Known As Enemy Expatriation Act Would Allow Government To Strip Citizenship Without Conviction

January 6, 2012
By Stephen D. Foster Jr.

First, Congress considered the National Defense Authorization Act, sections of which gave the President the authority to use the military to arrest and indefinitely detain Americans without trial or charge. The language was revised because of strong condemnation from the American people. But now a new bill has emerged that poses yet another threat to the American citizenry.

Congress is considering HR 3166 and S. 1698 also known as the Enemy Expatriation Act, sponsored by Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Charles Dent (R-PA). This bill would give the US government the power to strip Americans of their citizenship without being convicted of being “hostile” against the United States. In other words, you can be stripped of your nationality for “engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States.” Legally, the term “hostilities” means any conflict subject to the laws of war but considering the fact that the War on Terror is a little ambiguous and encompassing, any action could be labeled as supporting terrorism. Since the Occupy movement began, conservatives have been trying to paint the protesters as terrorists.

The new law would change a part of US Code 1481 which can be read in full here. Compare 3166 to 1481 and the change is small. The new section makes no reference to being convicted as it does in section (7). So even though the language of the NDAA has been revised to exclude American citizens, the US government merely has to strip Americans of their citizenship and the NDAA will apply. And they will be able to do so without convicting the accused in a court of law.

I hope I’m wrong, but it sounds to me like this is a loophole for indefinitely detaining Americans. Once again, you just have to be accused of supporting hostilities which could be defined any way the government sees fit. Then the government can strip your citizenship and apply the indefinite detention section of the NDAA without the benefit of a trial. This certainly must be questioned by American citizens. The way these defense obsessed Republicans think, our rights are always in danger of being taken away.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-3166

Nothing in this Section SHALL BE CONSTRUED = By SUPREME COURT !!!


NDAA HR1540 S1867

The Feinstein Amendment 1031(e) is dangerously misleading. Don’t be fooled: In the text of 1031(e), “Nothing in this section shall be construed…”, the only word that matters is “construed” because the Supreme Court are the only ones with the power to construe the law.

SEC. 1021 – Affirmation of authority of the armed forces of the United States to detain covered persons pursuant to the authorization for use of military force.

Notable:

Covered persons includes anyone with ties to 9/11 and anyone who was, or is part of, Al-Qaeda or the Taliban.
Under subsection (a) (1) “Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorizes by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.”

Under subsection (e) “Authorities – Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States” (added by the administration, as stated in signing statement this reaffirms the Patriot Act and does not explicitly extend more power than the executive branch already has)

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

Advertisement

The applicable language begins on page 428:

(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

OBAMA SIGNED NDAA !!!!

WILL NOBAMA DECLARE MARTIAL LAW TO STOP THE ELECTIONS !!!!!

Obama signs NDAA into law, dismantles Bill of Rights

Obama Signs Martial Law Bill: NDAA Now Law

Jenn Morrill, Salt Lake City Independent Examiner
December 31, 2011 –

Rumors have been floating around the internet for the past week or so that Obama signed NDAA into law before Christmas. Well, he didn’t. But that doesn’t really matter now, because today he did.

According to the ACLU, President Barack Obama just signed one of the most controversial bills into law since the Patriot Act. The sad part is that neither the House nor the Senate nor Obama seemed to think it was all that controversial, as it passed overwhelmingly in both the House and the Senate, and the president just signed it (even though he had at one time threatened to veto).

In case you haven’t heard, H.R. 1540: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 or NDAA, is not your typical defense spending bill. It gives authority to the president (or perhaps it’d be more fitting to call him king or ruler at this point) to order the military to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without official charge or trial on the mere suspicion of being a terrorist or linked to a terrorist organization.
Advertisement

Many in government will argue that there is nothing for Americans to worry about — unless you’re a terrorist that is. But as our government slips further and further from the rule of law and the founding principles of our nation that once made us great, tyranny inevitably creeps in to take its place. And when tyranny reigns, the line between who is a terrorist and who isn’t becomes easily blurred. A “terrorist” could simply mean a political enemy of the state.

The citizens of our country that understand what happened when Obama lifted his pen off the dotted line (while on vacation in Hawaii) wonder why their elected representatives don’t remotely represent them or stand up for the Constitution as they swear to do. In a previous article I pointed out that the U.S. senators from Utah were divided in their vote on this bill. Senator Orrin Hatch voted for NDAA, while Senator Mike Lee was one of only seven senators in the country that voted against it.

68 percent of the House voted in favor, and only one of three U.S. congressmen from Utah earned his title of “representative” by voting against the bill: Rep. Jason Chaffetz.

Rep. Jim Matheson (of district 2) is going to have a difficult time defending himself next year against his opponent, a Constitutional conservative and Utah State Representative, Carl Wimmer, who says he would have voted against the bill because Section 1031 (of the Senate-passed version) remained intact. Wimmer told Examiner that anyone who took an oath to uphold the Constitution should have voted against the bill. He said,
We’re well down a dangerous path, here — trying to preserve our safety by trading away what makes us American. Being “suspected” of having connections to terrorism is not justification for removing our right to due process. Some people I respect voted for this, but I’m afraid I strongly feel that this is a really bad bill.

Out of all the main contenders for the presidency, there is only one who has voiced opposition for the egregious bill. It should be predictable at this point that the one who stood on the side of the Constitution was Rep. Ron Paul. He said of the bill,
Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed…The Patriot Act, as bad as its violation of the 4th Amendment, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed (NDAA) continues that slip toward tyranny and in fact accelerates it significantly. The main section of concern, Section 1021 of the NDAA Conference Report, does to the 5th Amendment what the PATRIOT Act does to the 4th. The 5th Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning. It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented or access to legal counsel.

He explains that the dangers of the new law are in its deliberate vagueness:
The dangers in the NDAA are its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the US government without trial. It is now no longer limited to members of al Qaeda or the Taliban, but anyone accused of “substantially supporting” such groups or “associated forces.” How closely associated? And what constitutes “substantial” support? What if it was discovered that someone who committed a terrorist act was once involved with a charity? Or supported a political candidate? Are all donors of that charity or supporters of that candidate now suspect, and subject to indefinite detainment? Is that charity now an associated force?

The Bill of Rights has no exemption for ‘really bad people’ or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the bill of rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire Unites States is a battlefield in the War on Terror. This is a very dangerous development indeed. Beware.

It should be painfully obvious to Americans by now that if they continue to vote for the status quo, no matter if it’s Republican or Democrat, then the attack on civil liberties and the dismantling of the Constitution will inevitably continue.

So raise your glasses to toast the new year. It’s not even midnight, and your right to due process has already been taken away. What’s next?

(To see how your “representatives” voted, see below.)

http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-salt-lake-city/obama-signs-ndaa-into-law-dismantles-bill-of-rights?CID=examiner_alerts_article

NDAA S1867 HR1540 Section 1031E – 1032 !!! TRAITORS, TREASON & TYRANTS !!!!

USA Without PRESIDENT RON PAUL 2012 !!! YOU DECIDE !!!

AMERICA’S FUTURE WITHOUT PRESIDENT RON PAUL !!!

The Future without President Ron Paul . . . (Unofficial Version) [HD]

Get more details at: http://RonPaul2012.com

RP12 – Ron Paul 2012


RON PAUL OR FEMA CAMPS AND INTERNET KILL SWITCH !!! YOU DECIDE !!!!

Ron Paul Ad for NDAA & SOPA (Unofficial)

RON PAUL OR FEMA CAMPS !!!! YOU DECIDE !!!

NDAA – S1867 – HR1540 Section 1031E – 1032 – DHS – TSA – Posse Comitatus – Habius Corpus –

False Flags & Hegelian Dialectic !!!!

Manufactured Fear – 15 minutes that will change your life

A history of false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people!

Hitler’s Enabling Act + Reistag Decree = NDAA HR1540 S1867 + Patriot Act !!!!

Recipe for a Revolution

In history there are events which stand as milestones marking points of no return. Usually, however such moments are only visible in hind sight.

Civil Disobedience !!!

STRIKE – BOYCOTT – STOP COMPLIANCE – STOP CONSENT – YOU ARE THE RESISTANCE – WE THE PEOPLE HAVE THE POWER @ 99% – WE THE PEOPLE VERSUS THE MACHINE – GRASSHOPPER AND THE ANT !!!

Mad as Hell and we’re not going to take it anymore – get mad – water buffalos – crocodile – lions – Mass Media Brainwashing – Controlling the Masses – couch potatoes – turn off your TV sets and leave them off – mass madness – NWO Tubes – The Power of ONE – The Power of WE THE PEOPLE – Battle at Kruger

STOP COMPLIANCE START LIBERTY FREEDOM !!!!

Rise like Lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number,
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you –
Ye are many – they are few.

Percy Bysshe Shelley – The Mask of Anarchy

Written on the occasion of the massacre carried out by the British Government at Peterloo, Manchester 1819

MARIO SAVIO

December 2, 1964

ant and the grasshopper – tea party movement – occupy wall street – ows –

Howard Zinn

MARIO SAVIO – WE THE PEOPLE VERSUS THE MACHINE !!!

December 2, 1964

TEA PARTY – OWS – OCCUPY WALL STREET

RON PAUL Defense Bill Establishes Martial Law In America – NDAA S1867 HR1540 – Fast & Furious DOJ ATF Criminal False Flag


Ron Paul: Defense Bill Establishes Martial Law In America

Congressman condemns “bold, arrogant, dangerous” move to intern Americans without trial

LISTEN TO ENTIRE INTERVIEW LINK:

http://static.infowars.com/2011/12/i/general/20111213_RonPaul-Interview.mp3/a>

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Top tier presidential candidate Ron Paul has decried the ‘indefinite detention’ provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, warning that it represents an arrogant, bold and dangerous attempt to establish martial law in America.

Speaking with the Alex Jones Show today, Congressman Paul went on the offensive against the bill, which is set to be signed into law by President Obama later this week.

Section 1031 of the NDAA bill, which itself defines the entirety of the United States as a “battlefield,” allows American citizens to be snatched from the streets, carted off to a foreign detention camp and held indefinitely without trial. The bill states that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” faces indefinite detention, but no trial or evidence has to be presented, the White House merely needs to make the accusation.

Paul said he saw significance in “the announcement and the arrogance of it all,” making reference to the Obama administration’s claim that it can now assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world and noting that the passage of the NDAA bill is an effort to codify the policy into law.

“This is a giant step – this should be the biggest news going right now – literally legalizing martial law,” said Paul, noting that the subject did not come up at all in any of the Republican debates.

The Congressman also decried the “arrogance” of an attempt to push through via a voice vote an amendment that would have still authorized indefinite detention even if a detainee was found innocent after a trial. The amendment was narrowly defeated by his son, Senator Rand Paul.

“This is big,” emphasized Paul, adding “This step where they can literally arrest American citizens and put them away without trial….is arrogant and bold and dangerous.”

Despite speculation that the Obama administration would veto the bill, it emerged yesterday that it was the White House itself which worked to remove language from the bill that would have protected American citizens from indefinite detention under Section 1031.

The administration has been working with lawmakers to alter a separate provision, Section 1032, which pertains to the military being required to take custody of individuals.

With the administration’s concerns over Section 1032 now largely resolved, a revised and final version of the bill could be signed into law before the end of the week.

“The conferees said they plan to bring the bill to the House floor for a vote as soon as Wednesday afternoon and to the Senate soon thereafter,” reports Politico.

Despite the revisions, the bill still contains language that allows Americans to be detained without trial at a detention center anywhere in the world.

Republican Congressman Justin Amash has again warned that lawmakers are attempting to mislead the American people by claiming U.S. citizens are exempt from the most dangerous provisions of the bill.

“Pres. Obama and many Members of Congress believe the President ALREADY has the authority the bill grants him. Legally, of course, he does not. This language was inserted to keep proponents and opponents of the bill appeased, while permitting the President to assert that the improper power he has claimed all along is now in statute,” writes Amash.

“They will say that American citizens are specifically exempted under the following language in Sec. 1032: “The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States. Don’t be fooled. All this says is that the President is not REQUIRED to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial. It still PERMITS him to do so,” warns the Congressman.

Amash is encouraging Americans to contact their representatives and sign a petition expressing their opposition to the NDAA bill, calling it “one of the most anti-liberty pieces of legislation of our lifetime.”

Click here to listen to the interview with Ron Paul in full.

RP12 – RON PAUL 2012 – END THE FED – END THE WARS –

Ron Paul: Fast & Furious a Criminal False Flag

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 13, 2011

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show today, Texas Rep. and presidential candidate Ron Paul said Attorney General Eric Holder should be fired immediately and Congress should investigate his role in the Fast and Furious operation run by the ATF and the Justice Department.

The covert operation provided a large number of firearms to Mexican drug cartels waging war with one another and the Mexican government.

“He should be immediately fired,” Paul told Alex Jones, “and then there should be an investigation and find out if charges should be made.” He specifically criticized the government for continuously engaging in politically motivated and criminal behavior he characterized as false flag operations.

Documents released by CBS News reveal Fast and Furious was exploited to demonize the Second Amendment.

“Emails obtained by the network show ATF agents discussing how they could tie guns involved in Mexican violence to gun dealers based in the U.S. to justify the implementation of Demand Letter 3, a regulation that would require U.S. gun stores to report the sale of multiple rifles,” Paul Joseph Watson wrote on December 7.

Paul said the government “constantly” engages in such criminal behavior. He cited the example of an allegation made in October by the United States that Iran was involved in an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador. Paul characterized the incident as a “propaganda stunt.”

Following the arrest of a suspect it was discovered the plot was concocted by the FBI. An undercover DEA informant had “strongly pushed” the assassination idea on Mansour J. Arbabsiar, an Iranian-American used-car salesman who was “perennially disheveled” and “hopelessly disorganized,” according to news reports.

Rand Paul S1867 NDAA HR1540 !!! American “Suspects” Jailed for LIFE !!!

GUILTY UNLESS PROVEN INNOCENT AS A “SUSPECT” NOT INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY !!!!

“In Germany, they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a Jew.

And then they came for me, and by that time there was no one was left to SPEAK UP !!! ”

Pastor Martin Niemoller

Concentration camp survivor Speeches in 1946,

National Defense Authorization Act !!! Ron Paul 2012 !!! Google: “Matthew Alexander Torture”. this clip from the movie “The Siege”



Senate Vote On Passage: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
Number: Senate Vote #218 in 2011 [primary source: senate.gov]
Date: Dec 1, 2011 8:02PM
Result: Bill Passed
Bill: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

CSV

XML
VOTE OVERVIEW

Totals Democrats Republicans Independents
All Votes

Needed To Win
Yea: 93 (93%)
48 44 1
Nay: 7 (7%)
3 3 1
Present: 0 (0%)
0 0 0
Not Voting: 0 (0%)
0 0 0
Required: Simple Majority of 100 votes (=51 votes)
(Vacancies in Congress will affect vote totals.)

More information: Aye versus Yea Explained

VOTE DETAILS

Cartogram

Standard Projection

Horizontal bars indicate the two senators from a state voted differently.

Cartograms give an equal area in an image to an equal number of votes by distorting the image. Senate vote cartograms are shown with each state stretched or shrunk so that the states each take up an equal area because each state has two votes. For House votes, it is each congressional district which is stretched or shrunk.

Vote
[Sort]
State
[Sort]
Representative
[Sort by Name] [Sort by Party]
Alabama
Yea AL Sessions, Jefferson [R]
Yea AL Shelby, Richard [R]
Alaska
Yea AK Begich, Mark [D]
Yea AK Murkowski, Lisa [R]
Arizona
Yea AZ Kyl, Jon [R]
Yea AZ McCain, John [R]
Arkansas
Yea AR Boozman, John [R]
Yea AR Pryor, Mark [D]
California
Yea CA Boxer, Barbara [D]
Yea CA Feinstein, Dianne [D]
Colorado
Yea CO Bennet, Michael [D]
Yea CO Udall, Mark [D]
Connecticut
Yea CT Blumenthal, Richard [D]
Yea CT Lieberman, Joseph [I]
Delaware
Yea DE Carper, Thomas [D]
Yea DE Coons, Chris [D]
Florida
Yea FL Nelson, Bill [D]
Yea FL Rubio, Marco [R]
Georgia
Yea GA Chambliss, Saxby [R]
Yea GA Isakson, John [R]
Hawaii
Yea HI Akaka, Daniel [D]
Yea HI Inouye, Daniel [D]
Idaho
Yea ID Crapo, Michael [R]
Yea ID Risch, James [R]
Illinois
Yea IL Durbin, Richard [D]
Yea IL Kirk, Mark [R]
Indiana
Yea IN Coats, Daniel [R]
Yea IN Lugar, Richard [R]
Iowa
Yea IA Grassley, Charles [R]
Nay IA Harkin, Thomas [D]
Kansas
Yea KS Moran, Jerry [R]
Yea KS Roberts, Pat [R]
Kentucky
Yea KY McConnell, Mitch [R]
Nay KY Paul, Rand [R]
Louisiana
Yea LA Landrieu, Mary [D]
Yea LA Vitter, David [R]
Maine
Yea ME Collins, Susan [R]
Yea ME Snowe, Olympia [R]
Maryland
Yea MD Cardin, Benjamin [D]
Yea MD Mikulski, Barbara [D]
Massachusetts
Yea MA Brown, Scott [R]
Yea MA Kerry, John [D]
Michigan
Yea MI Levin, Carl [D]
Yea MI Stabenow, Debbie Ann [D]
Minnesota
Yea MN Franken, Al [D]
Yea MN Klobuchar, Amy [D]
Mississippi
Yea MS Cochran, Thad [R]
Yea MS Wicker, Roger [R]
Missouri
Yea MO Blunt, Roy [R]
Yea MO McCaskill, Claire [D]
Montana
Yea MT Baucus, Max [D]
Yea MT Tester, Jon [D]
Nebraska
Yea NE Johanns, Mike [R]
Yea NE Nelson, Ben [D]
Nevada
Yea NV Heller, Dean [R]
Yea NV Reid, Harry [D]
New Hampshire
Yea NH Ayotte, Kelly [R]
Yea NH Shaheen, Jeanne [D]
New Jersey
Yea NJ Lautenberg, Frank [D]
Yea NJ Menendez, Robert [D]
New Mexico
Yea NM Bingaman, Jeff [D]
Yea NM Udall, Tom [D]
New York
Yea NY Gillibrand, Kirsten [D]
Yea NY Schumer, Charles [D]
North Carolina
Yea NC Burr, Richard [R]
Yea NC Hagan, Kay [D]
North Dakota
Yea ND Conrad, Kent [D]
Yea ND Hoeven, John [R]
Ohio
Yea OH Brown, Sherrod [D]
Yea OH Portman, Robert [R]
Oklahoma
Nay OK Coburn, Thomas [R]
Yea OK Inhofe, James [R]
Oregon
Nay OR Merkley, Jeff [D]
Nay OR Wyden, Ron [D]
Pennsylvania
Yea PA Casey, Robert [D]
Yea PA Toomey, Patrick [R]
Rhode Island
Yea RI Reed, John [D]
Yea RI Whitehouse, Sheldon [D]
South Carolina
Yea SC DeMint, Jim [R]
Yea SC Graham, Lindsey [R]
South Dakota
Yea SD Johnson, Tim [D]
Yea SD Thune, John [R]
Tennessee
Yea TN Alexander, Lamar [R]
Yea TN Corker, Bob [R]
Texas
Yea TX Cornyn, John [R]
Yea TX Hutchison, Kay [R]
Utah
Yea UT Hatch, Orrin [R]
Nay UT Lee, Mike [R]
Vermont
Yea VT Leahy, Patrick [D]
Nay VT Sanders, Bernard [I]
Virginia
Yea VA Warner, Mark [D]
Yea VA Webb, Jim [D]
Washington
Yea WA Cantwell, Maria [D]
Yea WA Murray, Patty [D]
West Virginia
Yea WV Manchin, Joe [D]
Yea WV Rockefeller, John [D]
Wisconsin
Yea WI Johnson, Ron [R]
Yea WI Kohl, Herbert [D]
Wyoming
Yea WY Barrasso, John [R]
Yea WY Enzi, Michael [R]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-218/a>

The Entire United States is Now a War Zone: S.1867 Passes the Senate with Massive Support
–>Leave a Comment
Join The Exclusive Intel Hub Mailing List!

The Intel Hub
By Madison Ruppert – Editor of End the Lie
December 2, 2011

An official US Navy photograph of detainees at Camp X-Ray at the Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. If our government makes the call, this could be the horrific reality for countless American citizens for untold years or even decades (Credit: U.S. Navy/Shane T. McCoy)

This is one of the most tragic events I have written about since establishing End the Lie over eight months ago: the horrendous bill that would turn all of America into a battlefield and subject American citizens to indefinite military detention without charge or trial has passed the Senate.

To make matters even worse, only seven of our so-called representatives voted against the bill, proving once and for all (if anyone had any doubt remaining) that our government does not work for us in any way, shape, or form.

S.1867, or the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year of 2012, passed with a resounding 93-7 vote.
That’s right, 93 of our Senators voted to literally eviscerate what little rights were still protected after the PATRIOT Act was hastily pushed in the wake of the tragic events of September 11th, 2001.

The NDAA cuts Pentagon spending by $43 billion from last year’s budget, a number so insignificant when compared to the $662 billion still (officially) allocated, it is almost laughable.

The bill also contained an amendment which enacts strict new sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank and any entities that do business with it, a move which will likely have brutal repercussions for the Iranian people – just like the sanctions on Iraq did.

Not a single Senator voted against this amendment, which was voted on soon before the entirety of S.1867 was passed, despite the hollow threats of a veto from the Obama White House.

Based simply on historical precedent, I trust Obama’s promises as much as I trust the homeless man who told me he was John F. Kennedy.

I wish that I could believe that the Obama administration would strike down this horrific bill but I would be quite ignorant and naïve if I did so.

Furthermore, the White House’s official statement doesn’t even say that they will veto the bill. In fact, it says, “the President’s senior advisers [will] recommend a veto.”

As Glenn Greenwald points out, the objection isn’t even about opposing the detention of accused terrorists without a trial, instead it is the contention that, “whether an accused Terrorist is put in military detention rather than civilian custody is for the President alone to decide.”

Obama’s opposition has nothing to do with the rule of law or protecting Americans, in fact, Senator Levin disclosed and Dave Kopel reported that, “it was the Obama administration which told Congress to remove the language in the original bill which exempted American citizens and lawful residents from the detention power”.

As I have detailed in two past articles entitled Do not be deceived: S.1867 is the most dangerous bill since the PATRIOT Act and S.1253 will allow indefinite military detention of American civilians without charge or trial, the assurances that this will not be used on American citizens are hollow, evidenced by the fact that the Feinstein amendment to S.1867, amendment number 1126, which, according to the official Senate Democrats page, was an attempt at “prohibiting military authority to indefinitely detain US citizens” was rejected with a 45-55 vote.

Let’s examine some of the attempts to convince the American people that this will not change anything and that we will still be protected under law.

Florida’s Republican Senator Marco Antonio said, “In particular, some folks are concerned about the language in section 1031 that says that this includes ‘any person committing a belligerent act or directly supported such hostilities of such enemy forces.’

This language clearly and unequivocally refers back to al-Qaida, the Taliban, or its affiliates. Thus, not only would any person in question need to be involved with al-Qaida, the Taliban, or its surrogates, but that person must also engage in a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror in order to be detained under this provision.”

While this might sound reassuring to some, one must realize that the government can interpret just about anything as engaging “in a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror”.

Consider the fact that the Homeland Security Police Institute’s report published earlier this year partly focused on combating the “spread of the [terrorist] entity’s narrative” which sets the stage for the government being able to declare that spreading the narrative amounts to “a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror”.

At the time I wrote:

Part of these domestic efforts highlighted in the report is combating the “spread of the [terrorist] entity’s narrative” but never addressed is why exactly extremist groups have the ability to spread their narrative.

A frightening conclusion that can be drawn from the focus on the “spread of the entity’s narrative” is that such claims could be used to justify limiting the American right to free speech.

It would be very easy to justify eliminating free speech if much of the United States was convinced of the danger of spreading terrorist narrative.

The report doesn’t specifically explain what the narrative is or why it is so dangerous, but one could assume that any anti-government, anti-war, anti-corporatist and pro-human rights speech could be squeezed under this umbrella. Essentially, anything that criticizes or questions the United States could easily be demonized because it is allegedly spreading “the entity’s narrative”.

This raises an important question: could my work and the work of others devoted to exposing the fraud that is the “war on terror” and the intimate links between our government and the terrorist entities they are supposedly fighting be considered to be supporting these entities?

Unfortunately, the only conclusion I can come to is that it is possible for the following reasons:

1) The Department of Defense actually put a question on an examination saying that protests are an act of “low-level terrorism” (which they later deleted after the ACLU sent a letter demanding it be removed).

2) Anti-war activists and websites are deemed worthy of being treated as terrorists and being listed on terrorist watchlists.

3) We likely will never even be told how exactly the government is interpreting S.1867.
In the case of the PATRIOT Act (which is overwhelmingly used in cases that are unrelated to terrorism in every way), there is in fact a secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act, as revealed by Senator Ron Wyden back in May.
In October, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit (read the PDF here) in an attempt to force the government to reveal the details of the secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act.
As of now, we still do not know how the PATRIOT Act is interpreted by the government, meaning that we have no idea how it is actually being used.

I do not believe that it would be reasonable to make the assumption that S.1867 would be interpreted in a straightforward manner, meaning that all of the assurances being made by Senators are worthless.

Glenn Greenwald verifies this in writing the following as an update to the post previously quoted in this article, “Any doubt about whether this bill permits the military detention of U.S. citizens was dispelled entirely today when an amendment offered by Dianne Feinstein — to confine military detention to those apprehended “abroad,” i.e., off U.S. soil — failed by a vote of 45-55.”

Furthermore, as I detailed in my previous coverage of S.1867, Senator Lindsey Graham clearly said, in absolutely no uncertain terms whatsoever, “In summary here, [section] 1032, the military custody provision, which has waivers and a lot of flexibility doesn’t apply to American citizens. [Section] 1031, the statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens, and it designates the world as the battlefield including the homeland.”

The fact that the establishment media continues to peddle the blatant lie that is the claim that S.1867 will not be used on American citizens is beyond me.

This is especially true when one considers the fact that lawyers for the Obama administrations reaffirmed that American citizens “are legitimate military targets when they take up arms with al-Qaida,” although we all know that no proof or trial is required to make that assertion.

As evidenced by the case of Anwar al-Awlaki, no trial is needed for our illegitimate government to assassinate an American citizen.

We can only assume that it is just a matter of time until American citizens are declared to be supporting al Qaeda and killed on American soil without so much as a single court hearing.

CNN claims, “Senators ultimately reached an agreement to amend the bill to make clear it’s not the bill’s intent to allow for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens and others legally residing in the country.”

Yet, of course, they fail to cite the amendment, and quote Senator Feinstein in saying, “It supports present law,” even though Feinstein’s amendment was not passed.

The Associated Press reported, “Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., repeatedly pointed out that the June 2004 Supreme Court decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld said U.S. citizens can be detained indefinitely.”

Yet they still quoted senior legislative counsel for the ACLU Christopher Anders who said, “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.”

The fact that the corporate-controlled establishment media is barely covering this – if at all – is just another piece amongst the mountains of evidence showing that they are complicit in the criminal conspiracy that is dominating our government.
Every single Senator that voted for this amendment is a traitor. It’s that simple. 97 of our so-called representatives, which you can see listed in full here, are actively working against the American people.

They are turning the United States into such a hellish police state that the world’s most infamous dictators would be green with envy.

Unsurprisingly, the top stories on Google News makes no mention of the atrocious attack on everything that America was built upon that is embodied by S.1867.

This legislation is clearly being minimized and marginalized in the press, as if it is some minor bill that will never be invoked in order to detain Americans indefinitely without charge or trial.

That is patently absurd and to assume such would be nothing short of ignorant to an extreme degree, given that the American government utilizes every single possible method to exploit, oppress and assault Americans who stand up for their rights.
Furthermore, the Senators who voted against S.Amdt.1126, the amendment to S.1867 which would have limited “the authority of the Armed Forces to detain citizens of the United States under section 1031” should be considered traitorous criminals of the highest order, not to say that all 97 of those who voted for S.1867 are any better.

These Senators are not only defying their oath of office in waging war on the Constitution, they are also fighting to destroy the most critical rights we have in this country and in doing so are desecrating everything that our forefathers gave up their lives for.

Instead of British troops patrolling the streets in their red coats, it will be American soldiers who have the authority to detain you forever without a shred of evidence if they decide you’re a terrorist or supporting any organization affiliated with al Qaeda.

How they define that is anyone’s guess, but given that the entire interpretation of the PATRIOT Act is regarded as a state secret, we can assume that we will never even get to know.

Moreover, the fact that no charges or trial are needed under S.1867, the government needs no proof of supporting, planning, or committing terrorism whatsoever.

Since no evidence will ever be presented given that no trial or charges will ever be filed, they need not worry about that pesky thing called habeus corpus or anything resembling evidence of any kind.

All they need to do is declare that you’re an enemy combatant and suddenly you’re eligible to be snatched up by military thugs and locked away never to see the light of day again.

As far as I have seen, there are no detailed requirements set forth in the bill which have to be met before the military can indefinitely detain, and torture (or conduct “enhanced interrogation” if you’d prefer the government’s semantic work-around), Americans and people around the world.

What is stopping them from creating accounts for Americans who are actively resisting the fascistic police state corporatocracy which our once free nation has become on some jihadi website and using it has justification to claim these individuals are involved with terrorists?

What is stopping them from manufacturing any flimsy piece of evidence they can point to, even though they never actually have to present it or have it questioned in a court of law, in order to round up American dissidents?

The grim answer to these disturbing questions is: nothing. I regret having to say such a disheartening thing about the United States of America, a country I once thought was the freest nation in the world, but it is true.

I must emphasize once again that our government considers even ideology and protest to be a low level act of terrorism, so if you’re anti-war, pro-peace, pro-human rights, pro-justice, anti-corruption, or even worse, if you’re like me and expose the criminal government in Washington that supports terrorism while criminalizing American citizens, you very well might be labeled a terrorist.

Keep in mind that the House sister bill, H.R.1540, was passed with a 322-96 vote on May 26th, now all that is stopping this ludicrous from utterly eliminating the Bill of Rights is resolving the differences which will be done by the following appointed conferees: Levin; Lieberman; Reed; Akaka; Nelson NE; Webb; McCaskill; Udall CO; Hagan; Begich; Manchin; Shaheen; Gillibrand; Blumenthal; McCain; Inhofe; Sessions; Chambliss; Wicker; Brown MA; Portman; Ayotte; Collins; Graham; Cornyn; Vitter.
Unsurprisingly, not a single person who voted against S.1867 is included in that list.

I do not hesitate in saying that what our so-called representatives have done is an act of treason that represents the single most dangerous move ever made by our government.

Every single square inch of the United States is now a war zone and you or I could easily be declared soldiers on the wrong side of the war and treated as such.

No proof, no charges, and no trial are required. They do not even have to draw spurious links to terrorist organizations in order to indefinitely detain you as they could easily declare the evidence critical to national security and thus withhold it for as long as they please.

I will continue to hope that Obama decides to go against every single thing he has done after being sworn in but I think the chances are so slim that it is almost delusional to believe that he will do this.

After all, the only reason his administration is opposing it is because it doesn’t give the executive enough power, not because it strips away every legal protection we have.

If this is not the most laughably illegitimate reason to oppose the attack on all Americans that is S.1867, I don’t know what is.
The most important question that remains unanswered, for which I am not sure that I have a viable solution, is: how do we stop this? Is there any way we can bring down a criminal government packed to the brim with traitorous co-conspirators in a just, peaceful manner?

After all, if the American people resort to violence, we are no better than those bloodthirsty members of our armed forces and law enforcement who kill and beat human beings around our nation and the world with impunity.

However, if our military and police forces realize that at any moment they too could be deemed enemy combatants and treated like subhuman scum and thus decide to refuse all unlawful orders and arrest the real terrorists in Washington, we might be able to reinstate the rule of law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights which once defined our nation.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with your ideas, comments and information for future articles on this subject and any other issue for that matter. You can get in touch with me directly at Admin@EndtheLie.com and hopefully I will be able to read and respond if I’m not deemed an enemy combatant and shipped off to a CIA black site to be tortured into confessing to killing the

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in 1914.

Originally Appeared at End the Lie

THE UNITED STATES GULAG GESTAPO OF THE IRON CURTAIN !!!

MTV WARNINGS !!!! – National Defense Authorization Act S.1867

INDEFENITE DETENTION – NDAA !!!

SO YOU DO NOT THINK THIS CAN HAPPEN IN AMERICA ? IT ALREADY HAS, SEE LAST VIDEO @ BOTTOM OF PAGE 1942 WW2 !!!


OPERATION GARDEN PLOT !!!


REX 84 – MARTIAL LAW !!!

Senators Demand Military Lock Up Americans in “Battlefield” Defined as Outside Your Window

POLICE STATE ENOUGH YET – IMPERIAL EMPIRE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX WARS PROFITEERS !!!! FEMA CAMPS !!!

Chris Anders
ACLU
November 25, 2011

While nearly all Americans head to family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, the Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.

Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians 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. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. 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.
The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And 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?

The answer on why now is nothing more than election season politics. The White House, the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney General have all said that the indefinite detention provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act are harmful and counterproductive. The White House has even threatened a veto. But Senate politics has propelled this bad legislation to the Senate floor.

But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.

In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in.

In response to proponents of the indefinite detention legislation who contend that the bill “applies to American citizens and designates the world as the battlefield,” and that the “heart of the issue is whether or not the United States is part of the battlefield,” Sen. Udall disagrees, and says that we can win this fight without worldwide war and worldwide indefinite detention.

The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown. That is an extreme position that will forever change our country.

Now is the time to stop this bad idea. Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

US CONCENTRATION CAMPS OF 1942 IN AMERICA !!!

The William Lewis Films/Gary Franchi production opens with newsreel footage from the World War II era explaining the internment of Japanese Americans. At that time, the facilities were not referred to as “FEMA camps” (for those with questions, research REX 84), but were called War Relocation communities, as there was no Federal Emergency Management Agency at the time. What is revealed by the first two minutes of the film, however, is that of those relocated to these “communities,” more than two-thirds were American citizens, a fact that sets the stage for the rest of the well-documented film.

WANT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT FEMA CONCENTRATION CAMPS IN AMERICA LINK:

http://2012patriot.wordpress.com/?s=FEMA+CAMPS/a>

I DID NOT SPEAK UP !!!

“In Germany, they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a Jew.

And then they came for me, and by that time there was no one was left to SPEAK UP !!! ”

Pastor Martin Niemoller

Concentration camp survivor Speeches in 1946,

National Defense Authorization Act !!! Ron Paul 2012 !!! Google: “Matthew Alexander Torture”. this clip from the movie “The Siege”



Senate Vote On Passage: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
Number: Senate Vote #218 in 2011 [primary source: senate.gov]
Date: Dec 1, 2011 8:02PM
Result: Bill Passed
Bill: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

CSV

XML
VOTE OVERVIEW

Totals Democrats Republicans Independents
All Votes

Needed To Win
Yea: 93 (93%)
48 44 1
Nay: 7 (7%)
3 3 1
Present: 0 (0%)
0 0 0
Not Voting: 0 (0%)
0 0 0
Required: Simple Majority of 100 votes (=51 votes)
(Vacancies in Congress will affect vote totals.)

More information: Aye versus Yea Explained

VOTE DETAILS

Cartogram

Standard Projection

Horizontal bars indicate the two senators from a state voted differently.

Cartograms give an equal area in an image to an equal number of votes by distorting the image. Senate vote cartograms are shown with each state stretched or shrunk so that the states each take up an equal area because each state has two votes. For House votes, it is each congressional district which is stretched or shrunk.

Vote
[Sort]
State
[Sort]
Representative
[Sort by Name] [Sort by Party]
Alabama
Yea AL Sessions, Jefferson [R]
Yea AL Shelby, Richard [R]
Alaska
Yea AK Begich, Mark [D]
Yea AK Murkowski, Lisa [R]
Arizona
Yea AZ Kyl, Jon [R]
Yea AZ McCain, John [R]
Arkansas
Yea AR Boozman, John [R]
Yea AR Pryor, Mark [D]
California
Yea CA Boxer, Barbara [D]
Yea CA Feinstein, Dianne [D]
Colorado
Yea CO Bennet, Michael [D]
Yea CO Udall, Mark [D]
Connecticut
Yea CT Blumenthal, Richard [D]
Yea CT Lieberman, Joseph [I]
Delaware
Yea DE Carper, Thomas [D]
Yea DE Coons, Chris [D]
Florida
Yea FL Nelson, Bill [D]
Yea FL Rubio, Marco [R]
Georgia
Yea GA Chambliss, Saxby [R]
Yea GA Isakson, John [R]
Hawaii
Yea HI Akaka, Daniel [D]
Yea HI Inouye, Daniel [D]
Idaho
Yea ID Crapo, Michael [R]
Yea ID Risch, James [R]
Illinois
Yea IL Durbin, Richard [D]
Yea IL Kirk, Mark [R]
Indiana
Yea IN Coats, Daniel [R]
Yea IN Lugar, Richard [R]
Iowa
Yea IA Grassley, Charles [R]
Nay IA Harkin, Thomas [D]
Kansas
Yea KS Moran, Jerry [R]
Yea KS Roberts, Pat [R]
Kentucky
Yea KY McConnell, Mitch [R]
Nay KY Paul, Rand [R]
Louisiana
Yea LA Landrieu, Mary [D]
Yea LA Vitter, David [R]
Maine
Yea ME Collins, Susan [R]
Yea ME Snowe, Olympia [R]
Maryland
Yea MD Cardin, Benjamin [D]
Yea MD Mikulski, Barbara [D]
Massachusetts
Yea MA Brown, Scott [R]
Yea MA Kerry, John [D]
Michigan
Yea MI Levin, Carl [D]
Yea MI Stabenow, Debbie Ann [D]
Minnesota
Yea MN Franken, Al [D]
Yea MN Klobuchar, Amy [D]
Mississippi
Yea MS Cochran, Thad [R]
Yea MS Wicker, Roger [R]
Missouri
Yea MO Blunt, Roy [R]
Yea MO McCaskill, Claire [D]
Montana
Yea MT Baucus, Max [D]
Yea MT Tester, Jon [D]
Nebraska
Yea NE Johanns, Mike [R]
Yea NE Nelson, Ben [D]
Nevada
Yea NV Heller, Dean [R]
Yea NV Reid, Harry [D]
New Hampshire
Yea NH Ayotte, Kelly [R]
Yea NH Shaheen, Jeanne [D]
New Jersey
Yea NJ Lautenberg, Frank [D]
Yea NJ Menendez, Robert [D]
New Mexico
Yea NM Bingaman, Jeff [D]
Yea NM Udall, Tom [D]
New York
Yea NY Gillibrand, Kirsten [D]
Yea NY Schumer, Charles [D]
North Carolina
Yea NC Burr, Richard [R]
Yea NC Hagan, Kay [D]
North Dakota
Yea ND Conrad, Kent [D]
Yea ND Hoeven, John [R]
Ohio
Yea OH Brown, Sherrod [D]
Yea OH Portman, Robert [R]
Oklahoma
Nay OK Coburn, Thomas [R]
Yea OK Inhofe, James [R]
Oregon
Nay OR Merkley, Jeff [D]
Nay OR Wyden, Ron [D]
Pennsylvania
Yea PA Casey, Robert [D]
Yea PA Toomey, Patrick [R]
Rhode Island
Yea RI Reed, John [D]
Yea RI Whitehouse, Sheldon [D]
South Carolina
Yea SC DeMint, Jim [R]
Yea SC Graham, Lindsey [R]
South Dakota
Yea SD Johnson, Tim [D]
Yea SD Thune, John [R]
Tennessee
Yea TN Alexander, Lamar [R]
Yea TN Corker, Bob [R]
Texas
Yea TX Cornyn, John [R]
Yea TX Hutchison, Kay [R]
Utah
Yea UT Hatch, Orrin [R]
Nay UT Lee, Mike [R]
Vermont
Yea VT Leahy, Patrick [D]
Nay VT Sanders, Bernard [I]
Virginia
Yea VA Warner, Mark [D]
Yea VA Webb, Jim [D]
Washington
Yea WA Cantwell, Maria [D]
Yea WA Murray, Patty [D]
West Virginia
Yea WV Manchin, Joe [D]
Yea WV Rockefeller, John [D]
Wisconsin
Yea WI Johnson, Ron [R]
Yea WI Kohl, Herbert [D]
Wyoming
Yea WY Barrasso, John [R]
Yea WY Enzi, Michael [R]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-218/a>

The Entire United States is Now a War Zone: S.1867 Passes the Senate with Massive Support
–>Leave a Comment
Join The Exclusive Intel Hub Mailing List!

The Intel Hub
By Madison Ruppert – Editor of End the Lie
December 2, 2011

An official US Navy photograph of detainees at Camp X-Ray at the Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. If our government makes the call, this could be the horrific reality for countless American citizens for untold years or even decades (Credit: U.S. Navy/Shane T. McCoy)

This is one of the most tragic events I have written about since establishing End the Lie over eight months ago: the horrendous bill that would turn all of America into a battlefield and subject American citizens to indefinite military detention without charge or trial has passed the Senate.

To make matters even worse, only seven of our so-called representatives voted against the bill, proving once and for all (if anyone had any doubt remaining) that our government does not work for us in any way, shape, or form.

S.1867, or the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year of 2012, passed with a resounding 93-7 vote.
That’s right, 93 of our Senators voted to literally eviscerate what little rights were still protected after the PATRIOT Act was hastily pushed in the wake of the tragic events of September 11th, 2001.

The NDAA cuts Pentagon spending by $43 billion from last year’s budget, a number so insignificant when compared to the $662 billion still (officially) allocated, it is almost laughable.

The bill also contained an amendment which enacts strict new sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank and any entities that do business with it, a move which will likely have brutal repercussions for the Iranian people – just like the sanctions on Iraq did.

Not a single Senator voted against this amendment, which was voted on soon before the entirety of S.1867 was passed, despite the hollow threats of a veto from the Obama White House.

Based simply on historical precedent, I trust Obama’s promises as much as I trust the homeless man who told me he was John F. Kennedy.

I wish that I could believe that the Obama administration would strike down this horrific bill but I would be quite ignorant and naïve if I did so.

Furthermore, the White House’s official statement doesn’t even say that they will veto the bill. In fact, it says, “the President’s senior advisers [will] recommend a veto.”

As Glenn Greenwald points out, the objection isn’t even about opposing the detention of accused terrorists without a trial, instead it is the contention that, “whether an accused Terrorist is put in military detention rather than civilian custody is for the President alone to decide.”

Obama’s opposition has nothing to do with the rule of law or protecting Americans, in fact, Senator Levin disclosed and Dave Kopel reported that, “it was the Obama administration which told Congress to remove the language in the original bill which exempted American citizens and lawful residents from the detention power”.

As I have detailed in two past articles entitled Do not be deceived: S.1867 is the most dangerous bill since the PATRIOT Act and S.1253 will allow indefinite military detention of American civilians without charge or trial, the assurances that this will not be used on American citizens are hollow, evidenced by the fact that the Feinstein amendment to S.1867, amendment number 1126, which, according to the official Senate Democrats page, was an attempt at “prohibiting military authority to indefinitely detain US citizens” was rejected with a 45-55 vote.

Let’s examine some of the attempts to convince the American people that this will not change anything and that we will still be protected under law.

Florida’s Republican Senator Marco Antonio said, “In particular, some folks are concerned about the language in section 1031 that says that this includes ‘any person committing a belligerent act or directly supported such hostilities of such enemy forces.’

This language clearly and unequivocally refers back to al-Qaida, the Taliban, or its affiliates. Thus, not only would any person in question need to be involved with al-Qaida, the Taliban, or its surrogates, but that person must also engage in a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror in order to be detained under this provision.”

While this might sound reassuring to some, one must realize that the government can interpret just about anything as engaging “in a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror”.

Consider the fact that the Homeland Security Police Institute’s report published earlier this year partly focused on combating the “spread of the [terrorist] entity’s narrative” which sets the stage for the government being able to declare that spreading the narrative amounts to “a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror”.

At the time I wrote:

Part of these domestic efforts highlighted in the report is combating the “spread of the [terrorist] entity’s narrative” but never addressed is why exactly extremist groups have the ability to spread their narrative.

A frightening conclusion that can be drawn from the focus on the “spread of the entity’s narrative” is that such claims could be used to justify limiting the American right to free speech.

It would be very easy to justify eliminating free speech if much of the United States was convinced of the danger of spreading terrorist narrative.

The report doesn’t specifically explain what the narrative is or why it is so dangerous, but one could assume that any anti-government, anti-war, anti-corporatist and pro-human rights speech could be squeezed under this umbrella. Essentially, anything that criticizes or questions the United States could easily be demonized because it is allegedly spreading “the entity’s narrative”.

This raises an important question: could my work and the work of others devoted to exposing the fraud that is the “war on terror” and the intimate links between our government and the terrorist entities they are supposedly fighting be considered to be supporting these entities?

Unfortunately, the only conclusion I can come to is that it is possible for the following reasons:

1) The Department of Defense actually put a question on an examination saying that protests are an act of “low-level terrorism” (which they later deleted after the ACLU sent a letter demanding it be removed).

2) Anti-war activists and websites are deemed worthy of being treated as terrorists and being listed on terrorist watchlists.

3) We likely will never even be told how exactly the government is interpreting S.1867.
In the case of the PATRIOT Act (which is overwhelmingly used in cases that are unrelated to terrorism in every way), there is in fact a secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act, as revealed by Senator Ron Wyden back in May.
In October, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit (read the PDF here) in an attempt to force the government to reveal the details of the secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act.
As of now, we still do not know how the PATRIOT Act is interpreted by the government, meaning that we have no idea how it is actually being used.

I do not believe that it would be reasonable to make the assumption that S.1867 would be interpreted in a straightforward manner, meaning that all of the assurances being made by Senators are worthless.

Glenn Greenwald verifies this in writing the following as an update to the post previously quoted in this article, “Any doubt about whether this bill permits the military detention of U.S. citizens was dispelled entirely today when an amendment offered by Dianne Feinstein — to confine military detention to those apprehended “abroad,” i.e., off U.S. soil — failed by a vote of 45-55.”

Furthermore, as I detailed in my previous coverage of S.1867, Senator Lindsey Graham clearly said, in absolutely no uncertain terms whatsoever, “In summary here, [section] 1032, the military custody provision, which has waivers and a lot of flexibility doesn’t apply to American citizens. [Section] 1031, the statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens, and it designates the world as the battlefield including the homeland.”

The fact that the establishment media continues to peddle the blatant lie that is the claim that S.1867 will not be used on American citizens is beyond me.

This is especially true when one considers the fact that lawyers for the Obama administrations reaffirmed that American citizens “are legitimate military targets when they take up arms with al-Qaida,” although we all know that no proof or trial is required to make that assertion.

As evidenced by the case of Anwar al-Awlaki, no trial is needed for our illegitimate government to assassinate an American citizen.

We can only assume that it is just a matter of time until American citizens are declared to be supporting al Qaeda and killed on American soil without so much as a single court hearing.

CNN claims, “Senators ultimately reached an agreement to amend the bill to make clear it’s not the bill’s intent to allow for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens and others legally residing in the country.”

Yet, of course, they fail to cite the amendment, and quote Senator Feinstein in saying, “It supports present law,” even though Feinstein’s amendment was not passed.

The Associated Press reported, “Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., repeatedly pointed out that the June 2004 Supreme Court decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld said U.S. citizens can be detained indefinitely.”

Yet they still quoted senior legislative counsel for the ACLU Christopher Anders who said, “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.”

The fact that the corporate-controlled establishment media is barely covering this – if at all – is just another piece amongst the mountains of evidence showing that they are complicit in the criminal conspiracy that is dominating our government.
Every single Senator that voted for this amendment is a traitor. It’s that simple. 97 of our so-called representatives, which you can see listed in full here, are actively working against the American people.

They are turning the United States into such a hellish police state that the world’s most infamous dictators would be green with envy.

Unsurprisingly, the top stories on Google News makes no mention of the atrocious attack on everything that America was built upon that is embodied by S.1867.

This legislation is clearly being minimized and marginalized in the press, as if it is some minor bill that will never be invoked in order to detain Americans indefinitely without charge or trial.

That is patently absurd and to assume such would be nothing short of ignorant to an extreme degree, given that the American government utilizes every single possible method to exploit, oppress and assault Americans who stand up for their rights.
Furthermore, the Senators who voted against S.Amdt.1126, the amendment to S.1867 which would have limited “the authority of the Armed Forces to detain citizens of the United States under section 1031” should be considered traitorous criminals of the highest order, not to say that all 97 of those who voted for S.1867 are any better.

These Senators are not only defying their oath of office in waging war on the Constitution, they are also fighting to destroy the most critical rights we have in this country and in doing so are desecrating everything that our forefathers gave up their lives for.

Instead of British troops patrolling the streets in their red coats, it will be American soldiers who have the authority to detain you forever without a shred of evidence if they decide you’re a terrorist or supporting any organization affiliated with al Qaeda.

How they define that is anyone’s guess, but given that the entire interpretation of the PATRIOT Act is regarded as a state secret, we can assume that we will never even get to know.

Moreover, the fact that no charges or trial are needed under S.1867, the government needs no proof of supporting, planning, or committing terrorism whatsoever.

Since no evidence will ever be presented given that no trial or charges will ever be filed, they need not worry about that pesky thing called habeus corpus or anything resembling evidence of any kind.

All they need to do is declare that you’re an enemy combatant and suddenly you’re eligible to be snatched up by military thugs and locked away never to see the light of day again.

As far as I have seen, there are no detailed requirements set forth in the bill which have to be met before the military can indefinitely detain, and torture (or conduct “enhanced interrogation” if you’d prefer the government’s semantic work-around), Americans and people around the world.

What is stopping them from creating accounts for Americans who are actively resisting the fascistic police state corporatocracy which our once free nation has become on some jihadi website and using it has justification to claim these individuals are involved with terrorists?

What is stopping them from manufacturing any flimsy piece of evidence they can point to, even though they never actually have to present it or have it questioned in a court of law, in order to round up American dissidents?

The grim answer to these disturbing questions is: nothing. I regret having to say such a disheartening thing about the United States of America, a country I once thought was the freest nation in the world, but it is true.

I must emphasize once again that our government considers even ideology and protest to be a low level act of terrorism, so if you’re anti-war, pro-peace, pro-human rights, pro-justice, anti-corruption, or even worse, if you’re like me and expose the criminal government in Washington that supports terrorism while criminalizing American citizens, you very well might be labeled a terrorist.

Keep in mind that the House sister bill, H.R.1540, was passed with a 322-96 vote on May 26th, now all that is stopping this ludicrous from utterly eliminating the Bill of Rights is resolving the differences which will be done by the following appointed conferees: Levin; Lieberman; Reed; Akaka; Nelson NE; Webb; McCaskill; Udall CO; Hagan; Begich; Manchin; Shaheen; Gillibrand; Blumenthal; McCain; Inhofe; Sessions; Chambliss; Wicker; Brown MA; Portman; Ayotte; Collins; Graham; Cornyn; Vitter.
Unsurprisingly, not a single person who voted against S.1867 is included in that list.

I do not hesitate in saying that what our so-called representatives have done is an act of treason that represents the single most dangerous move ever made by our government.

Every single square inch of the United States is now a war zone and you or I could easily be declared soldiers on the wrong side of the war and treated as such.

No proof, no charges, and no trial are required. They do not even have to draw spurious links to terrorist organizations in order to indefinitely detain you as they could easily declare the evidence critical to national security and thus withhold it for as long as they please.

I will continue to hope that Obama decides to go against every single thing he has done after being sworn in but I think the chances are so slim that it is almost delusional to believe that he will do this.

After all, the only reason his administration is opposing it is because it doesn’t give the executive enough power, not because it strips away every legal protection we have.

If this is not the most laughably illegitimate reason to oppose the attack on all Americans that is S.1867, I don’t know what is.
The most important question that remains unanswered, for which I am not sure that I have a viable solution, is: how do we stop this? Is there any way we can bring down a criminal government packed to the brim with traitorous co-conspirators in a just, peaceful manner?

After all, if the American people resort to violence, we are no better than those bloodthirsty members of our armed forces and law enforcement who kill and beat human beings around our nation and the world with impunity.

However, if our military and police forces realize that at any moment they too could be deemed enemy combatants and treated like subhuman scum and thus decide to refuse all unlawful orders and arrest the real terrorists in Washington, we might be able to reinstate the rule of law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights which once defined our nation.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with your ideas, comments and information for future articles on this subject and any other issue for that matter. You can get in touch with me directly at Admin@EndtheLie.com and hopefully I will be able to read and respond if I’m not deemed an enemy combatant and shipped off to a CIA black site to be tortured into confessing to killing the

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in 1914.

Originally Appeared at End the Lie

THE UNITED STATES GULAG GESTAPO OF THE IRON CURTAIN !!!

MTV WARNINGS !!!! – National Defense Authorization Act S.1867

EPIPHANY PREPPERS 2A !!!!

guns – 2a – nra – goa – second amendment – militia – God, Guns, Gold, Get Away Plan, Food, Water & Ammo ! Minutemen – Revolution – Get/Be Prepared !

Preppers = God, Guns, Guts, Gold, Food, Ammo & Get Away Plan !!!

‘Preppers’ stock up on guns’n’gear as financial doom looms

Russia Today
Thursday, August 11, 2011

With political instability spreading across the globe and fears of more Fukushima-style nuclear disasters, the number of doomsday believers is on the rise. But now it’s also the struggling global economy that’s increasingly making people stock up on basic neccessities. RT’s Anastasia Churkina met some Americans, who are ready for the worst.

Food Storage Preppers !!!

Why is George Soros selling gold and buying farmland?

Mike Adams
Natural News
Aug 15, 2011

Food prices are skyrocketing all across the globe, and there’s no end in sight. The United Nations says food inflation is currently at 30% a year, and the fast-eroding value of the dollar is causing food prices to appear even higher (in contrast to a weakening currency). As the dollar drops in value due to runaway money printing at the Federal Reserve, the cost to import foods from other nations looks to double in just the next two years — and possibly every two years thereafter.

That’s probably why investors around the globe are flocking to farmland as the new growth industry. “Investors are pouring into farmland in the U.S. and parts of Europe, Latin America and Africa as global food prices soar,” reports Bloomberg magazine (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-…). “A fund controlled by George Soros, the billionaire hedge-fund manager, owns 23.4 percent of South American farmland venture Adecoagro SA.”

Jim Rogers is also quoted in the same story, saying, “I have frequently told people that one of the best investments in the world will be farmland.”

That’s because demand for food is accelerating even as radical climate changes, a loss of fossil water supplies, and the failure of genetically engineered crops is actually reducing food yields around the globe. Ceres Partners, which invests in farmland, has produced astonishing 16 percent annual returns since its launch in 2008. And this is during a depressed economy when most other industries are showing losses.

Why growing and storing your own food can be a goldmine

All this means we can count on three things happening in the years ahead:

Prediction #1) Food supplies will become more scarce.

Prediction #2) Food prices will double over the next 2-3 years, and then probably double again in another 2-3 years.

Prediction #3) When food prices are 400% of today’s levels, backyard farming or gardening pays off big in terms of real dollar savings.

In other words, as food prices skyrocket, it becomes increasingly more financially viable to grow your own food (or store it now while prices are low). I’m listing some resources below where you can learn more about growing your own food or storing high-density superfoods right now, but in the mean time, I’d like you to start considering the idea of starting your own garden in the spring.

You can’t grow gold. You can’t print your own currency (unless you’re the Fed). But you CAN grow something more valuable than gold and money: Food!

Lessons from post World War II Taiwan and why food is more valuable than gold I lived in Taiwan for two years, and I’ve had the opportunity to talk with people there who lived through the post World War II recovery. During the war, of course, Taiwan was occupied by the imperialist Japanese empire, and Taiwan existed in a state of military occupation (with perpetual martial law).

After the war ended and the Japanese left, Taiwan bootstrapped its own government into power under Chiang Kai-shek. The old Taiwan currency was immediately printed in large quantities by the Taiwan government leading to a runaway inflation scenario for what is now called the “old Taiwan dollar.” Very quickly, however, the government launched a new currency called the New Taiwan dollar (NT$). By 1949, the old Taiwan dollar was being exchanged for the New Taiwan dollar (NT$) at a ratio of 40,000 to 1. (Yep. You had $40,000 and now it’s worth a buck…).

During those years after WWII, if you wanted to rent an apartment, buy a house or find a place to live, cash was worthless and even GOLD wasn’t considered very useful. The only thing that represented real wealth was FOOD. If you had food, you could trade it for anything: an automobile, a home, tools, clothing or even land. If you didn’t have food, you were bankrupt; regardless of how much cash or gold you had.

A chicken that could lay eggs was worth more than an ounce of gold!

You can’t eat gold, folks. And you can’t eat silver. Everybody has to eat to stay alive, and that means everybody needs a constant stream of food just to keep breathing. That’s why investing in food makes so much sense.

And by “investing in food,” I mean any or all of the following:

• Investing in storable food that you can save on the shelf and keep for future use or barter.

• Investing in your own gardening skills so that you have the know-how to produce food when needed.

• Investing in non-hybrid garden seeds so that you have the genetic blueprints to grow food that can propagate itself generation after generation.

• Investing in farmland — especially farmland with water — that offers the fertility and climate to produce food.

• Investing in educational courses that teach you how to create food through a variety of methods: Wildcrafting, gardening, sprouting and so on.

More How To Details:

http://www.chrismartenson.com/forum/successful-food-storage-day-9-familes-4-tons-5-hours-lessons-learned-recommendations/27519/a>

Domestic Terrorist Lists, Charts, Groups, Bumper Stickers & SUSPECTS !!! DO YOU QUALIFY ????

WHO ACCUSES YOU SECRETLY !!!!

Are You on the Domestic Terrorist Official DHS Checklist ???

Pro-Constitution, Pro-Life, Pro-Gun, Anti-Tax = End the IRS, Military Veteran, Pro-Sound Money = End the FED, Flag Waving Patriot, Pro Limited Government – Ron Paul Supporter Bumper Sticker, Tea Party, Protestor, Activist & OWS Occupy Wall Street

RP12 – Ron Paul 2012

Domestic Terrorist Bumper Stickers ???

Anyone with a Ron Paul bumper sticker may be a violent radical? NDAA – S1867 – HR1540 – Fusion Centers – MIAC Report –
Credit ProConstituioner@YT – RP12 – Ron Paul 2012 – Pr-Life – Anti-Abortion – Militia – NAU Superhighway – 2A – Guns – NRA – GOA – /strong>

ACCUSED SUSPECTS AMERICAN CITIZENS JAILED FOR LIFE WITHOUT TRIAL BY US MILITARY !!!

GUILTY UNLESS PROVEN INNOCENT AS A “SUSPECT” NOT INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY !!!! RAND PAUL NDAA S1867 HR1540

“In Germany, they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t SPEAK UP because I wasn’t a Jew.

And then they came for me, and by that time there was no one was left to SPEAK UP !!! ”

Pastor Martin Niemoller

Concentration camp survivor Speeches in 1946,

National Defense Authorization Act !!! Ron Paul 2012 !!! Google: “Matthew Alexander Torture”. this clip from the movie “The Siege”



Senate Vote On Passage: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
Number: Senate Vote #218 in 2011 [primary source: senate.gov]
Date: Dec 1, 2011 8:02PM
Result: Bill Passed
Bill: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

CSV

XML
VOTE OVERVIEW

Totals Democrats Republicans Independents
All Votes

Needed To Win
Yea: 93 (93%)
48 44 1
Nay: 7 (7%)
3 3 1
Present: 0 (0%)
0 0 0
Not Voting: 0 (0%)
0 0 0
Required: Simple Majority of 100 votes (=51 votes)
(Vacancies in Congress will affect vote totals.)

More information: Aye versus Yea Explained

VOTE DETAILS

Cartogram

Standard Projection

Horizontal bars indicate the two senators from a state voted differently.

Cartograms give an equal area in an image to an equal number of votes by distorting the image. Senate vote cartograms are shown with each state stretched or shrunk so that the states each take up an equal area because each state has two votes. For House votes, it is each congressional district which is stretched or shrunk.

Vote
[Sort]
State
[Sort]
Representative
[Sort by Name] [Sort by Party]
Alabama
Yea AL Sessions, Jefferson [R]
Yea AL Shelby, Richard [R]
Alaska
Yea AK Begich, Mark [D]
Yea AK Murkowski, Lisa [R]
Arizona
Yea AZ Kyl, Jon [R]
Yea AZ McCain, John [R]
Arkansas
Yea AR Boozman, John [R]
Yea AR Pryor, Mark [D]
California
Yea CA Boxer, Barbara [D]
Yea CA Feinstein, Dianne [D]
Colorado
Yea CO Bennet, Michael [D]
Yea CO Udall, Mark [D]
Connecticut
Yea CT Blumenthal, Richard [D]
Yea CT Lieberman, Joseph [I]
Delaware
Yea DE Carper, Thomas [D]
Yea DE Coons, Chris [D]
Florida
Yea FL Nelson, Bill [D]
Yea FL Rubio, Marco [R]
Georgia
Yea GA Chambliss, Saxby [R]
Yea GA Isakson, John [R]
Hawaii
Yea HI Akaka, Daniel [D]
Yea HI Inouye, Daniel [D]
Idaho
Yea ID Crapo, Michael [R]
Yea ID Risch, James [R]
Illinois
Yea IL Durbin, Richard [D]
Yea IL Kirk, Mark [R]
Indiana
Yea IN Coats, Daniel [R]
Yea IN Lugar, Richard [R]
Iowa
Yea IA Grassley, Charles [R]
Nay IA Harkin, Thomas [D]
Kansas
Yea KS Moran, Jerry [R]
Yea KS Roberts, Pat [R]
Kentucky
Yea KY McConnell, Mitch [R]
Nay KY Paul, Rand [R]
Louisiana
Yea LA Landrieu, Mary [D]
Yea LA Vitter, David [R]
Maine
Yea ME Collins, Susan [R]
Yea ME Snowe, Olympia [R]
Maryland
Yea MD Cardin, Benjamin [D]
Yea MD Mikulski, Barbara [D]
Massachusetts
Yea MA Brown, Scott [R]
Yea MA Kerry, John [D]
Michigan
Yea MI Levin, Carl [D]
Yea MI Stabenow, Debbie Ann [D]
Minnesota
Yea MN Franken, Al [D]
Yea MN Klobuchar, Amy [D]
Mississippi
Yea MS Cochran, Thad [R]
Yea MS Wicker, Roger [R]
Missouri
Yea MO Blunt, Roy [R]
Yea MO McCaskill, Claire [D]
Montana
Yea MT Baucus, Max [D]
Yea MT Tester, Jon [D]
Nebraska
Yea NE Johanns, Mike [R]
Yea NE Nelson, Ben [D]
Nevada
Yea NV Heller, Dean [R]
Yea NV Reid, Harry [D]
New Hampshire
Yea NH Ayotte, Kelly [R]
Yea NH Shaheen, Jeanne [D]
New Jersey
Yea NJ Lautenberg, Frank [D]
Yea NJ Menendez, Robert [D]
New Mexico
Yea NM Bingaman, Jeff [D]
Yea NM Udall, Tom [D]
New York
Yea NY Gillibrand, Kirsten [D]
Yea NY Schumer, Charles [D]
North Carolina
Yea NC Burr, Richard [R]
Yea NC Hagan, Kay [D]
North Dakota
Yea ND Conrad, Kent [D]
Yea ND Hoeven, John [R]
Ohio
Yea OH Brown, Sherrod [D]
Yea OH Portman, Robert [R]
Oklahoma
Nay OK Coburn, Thomas [R]
Yea OK Inhofe, James [R]
Oregon
Nay OR Merkley, Jeff [D]
Nay OR Wyden, Ron [D]
Pennsylvania
Yea PA Casey, Robert [D]
Yea PA Toomey, Patrick [R]
Rhode Island
Yea RI Reed, John [D]
Yea RI Whitehouse, Sheldon [D]
South Carolina
Yea SC DeMint, Jim [R]
Yea SC Graham, Lindsey [R]
South Dakota
Yea SD Johnson, Tim [D]
Yea SD Thune, John [R]
Tennessee
Yea TN Alexander, Lamar [R]
Yea TN Corker, Bob [R]
Texas
Yea TX Cornyn, John [R]
Yea TX Hutchison, Kay [R]
Utah
Yea UT Hatch, Orrin [R]
Nay UT Lee, Mike [R]
Vermont
Yea VT Leahy, Patrick [D]
Nay VT Sanders, Bernard [I]
Virginia
Yea VA Warner, Mark [D]
Yea VA Webb, Jim [D]
Washington
Yea WA Cantwell, Maria [D]
Yea WA Murray, Patty [D]
West Virginia
Yea WV Manchin, Joe [D]
Yea WV Rockefeller, John [D]
Wisconsin
Yea WI Johnson, Ron [R]
Yea WI Kohl, Herbert [D]
Wyoming
Yea WY Barrasso, John [R]
Yea WY Enzi, Michael [R]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-218/a>

The Entire United States is Now a War Zone: S.1867 Passes the Senate with Massive Support
–>Leave a Comment
Join The Exclusive Intel Hub Mailing List!

The Intel Hub
By Madison Ruppert – Editor of End the Lie
December 2, 2011

An official US Navy photograph of detainees at Camp X-Ray at the Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. If our government makes the call, this could be the horrific reality for countless American citizens for untold years or even decades (Credit: U.S. Navy/Shane T. McCoy)

This is one of the most tragic events I have written about since establishing End the Lie over eight months ago: the horrendous bill that would turn all of America into a battlefield and subject American citizens to indefinite military detention without charge or trial has passed the Senate.

To make matters even worse, only seven of our so-called representatives voted against the bill, proving once and for all (if anyone had any doubt remaining) that our government does not work for us in any way, shape, or form.

S.1867, or the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year of 2012, passed with a resounding 93-7 vote.
That’s right, 93 of our Senators voted to literally eviscerate what little rights were still protected after the PATRIOT Act was hastily pushed in the wake of the tragic events of September 11th, 2001.

The NDAA cuts Pentagon spending by $43 billion from last year’s budget, a number so insignificant when compared to the $662 billion still (officially) allocated, it is almost laughable.

The bill also contained an amendment which enacts strict new sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank and any entities that do business with it, a move which will likely have brutal repercussions for the Iranian people – just like the sanctions on Iraq did.

Not a single Senator voted against this amendment, which was voted on soon before the entirety of S.1867 was passed, despite the hollow threats of a veto from the Obama White House.

Based simply on historical precedent, I trust Obama’s promises as much as I trust the homeless man who told me he was John F. Kennedy.

I wish that I could believe that the Obama administration would strike down this horrific bill but I would be quite ignorant and naïve if I did so.

Furthermore, the White House’s official statement doesn’t even say that they will veto the bill. In fact, it says, “the President’s senior advisers [will] recommend a veto.”

As Glenn Greenwald points out, the objection isn’t even about opposing the detention of accused terrorists without a trial, instead it is the contention that, “whether an accused Terrorist is put in military detention rather than civilian custody is for the President alone to decide.”

Obama’s opposition has nothing to do with the rule of law or protecting Americans, in fact, Senator Levin disclosed and Dave Kopel reported that, “it was the Obama administration which told Congress to remove the language in the original bill which exempted American citizens and lawful residents from the detention power”.

As I have detailed in two past articles entitled Do not be deceived: S.1867 is the most dangerous bill since the PATRIOT Act and S.1253 will allow indefinite military detention of American civilians without charge or trial, the assurances that this will not be used on American citizens are hollow, evidenced by the fact that the Feinstein amendment to S.1867, amendment number 1126, which, according to the official Senate Democrats page, was an attempt at “prohibiting military authority to indefinitely detain US citizens” was rejected with a 45-55 vote.

Let’s examine some of the attempts to convince the American people that this will not change anything and that we will still be protected under law.

Florida’s Republican Senator Marco Antonio said, “In particular, some folks are concerned about the language in section 1031 that says that this includes ‘any person committing a belligerent act or directly supported such hostilities of such enemy forces.’

This language clearly and unequivocally refers back to al-Qaida, the Taliban, or its affiliates. Thus, not only would any person in question need to be involved with al-Qaida, the Taliban, or its surrogates, but that person must also engage in a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror in order to be detained under this provision.”

While this might sound reassuring to some, one must realize that the government can interpret just about anything as engaging “in a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror”.

Consider the fact that the Homeland Security Police Institute’s report published earlier this year partly focused on combating the “spread of the [terrorist] entity’s narrative” which sets the stage for the government being able to declare that spreading the narrative amounts to “a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror”.

At the time I wrote:

Part of these domestic efforts highlighted in the report is combating the “spread of the [terrorist] entity’s narrative” but never addressed is why exactly extremist groups have the ability to spread their narrative.

A frightening conclusion that can be drawn from the focus on the “spread of the entity’s narrative” is that such claims could be used to justify limiting the American right to free speech.

It would be very easy to justify eliminating free speech if much of the United States was convinced of the danger of spreading terrorist narrative.

The report doesn’t specifically explain what the narrative is or why it is so dangerous, but one could assume that any anti-government, anti-war, anti-corporatist and pro-human rights speech could be squeezed under this umbrella. Essentially, anything that criticizes or questions the United States could easily be demonized because it is allegedly spreading “the entity’s narrative”.

This raises an important question: could my work and the work of others devoted to exposing the fraud that is the “war on terror” and the intimate links between our government and the terrorist entities they are supposedly fighting be considered to be supporting these entities?

Unfortunately, the only conclusion I can come to is that it is possible for the following reasons:

1) The Department of Defense actually put a question on an examination saying that protests are an act of “low-level terrorism” (which they later deleted after the ACLU sent a letter demanding it be removed).

2) Anti-war activists and websites are deemed worthy of being treated as terrorists and being listed on terrorist watchlists.

3) We likely will never even be told how exactly the government is interpreting S.1867.
In the case of the PATRIOT Act (which is overwhelmingly used in cases that are unrelated to terrorism in every way), there is in fact a secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act, as revealed by Senator Ron Wyden back in May.
In October, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit (read the PDF here) in an attempt to force the government to reveal the details of the secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act.
As of now, we still do not know how the PATRIOT Act is interpreted by the government, meaning that we have no idea how it is actually being used.

I do not believe that it would be reasonable to make the assumption that S.1867 would be interpreted in a straightforward manner, meaning that all of the assurances being made by Senators are worthless.

Glenn Greenwald verifies this in writing the following as an update to the post previously quoted in this article, “Any doubt about whether this bill permits the military detention of U.S. citizens was dispelled entirely today when an amendment offered by Dianne Feinstein — to confine military detention to those apprehended “abroad,” i.e., off U.S. soil — failed by a vote of 45-55.”

Furthermore, as I detailed in my previous coverage of S.1867, Senator Lindsey Graham clearly said, in absolutely no uncertain terms whatsoever, “In summary here, [section] 1032, the military custody provision, which has waivers and a lot of flexibility doesn’t apply to American citizens. [Section] 1031, the statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens, and it designates the world as the battlefield including the homeland.”

The fact that the establishment media continues to peddle the blatant lie that is the claim that S.1867 will not be used on American citizens is beyond me.

This is especially true when one considers the fact that lawyers for the Obama administrations reaffirmed that American citizens “are legitimate military targets when they take up arms with al-Qaida,” although we all know that no proof or trial is required to make that assertion.

As evidenced by the case of Anwar al-Awlaki, no trial is needed for our illegitimate government to assassinate an American citizen.

We can only assume that it is just a matter of time until American citizens are declared to be supporting al Qaeda and killed on American soil without so much as a single court hearing.

CNN claims, “Senators ultimately reached an agreement to amend the bill to make clear it’s not the bill’s intent to allow for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens and others legally residing in the country.”

Yet, of course, they fail to cite the amendment, and quote Senator Feinstein in saying, “It supports present law,” even though Feinstein’s amendment was not passed.

The Associated Press reported, “Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., repeatedly pointed out that the June 2004 Supreme Court decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld said U.S. citizens can be detained indefinitely.”

Yet they still quoted senior legislative counsel for the ACLU Christopher Anders who said, “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.”

The fact that the corporate-controlled establishment media is barely covering this – if at all – is just another piece amongst the mountains of evidence showing that they are complicit in the criminal conspiracy that is dominating our government.
Every single Senator that voted for this amendment is a traitor. It’s that simple. 97 of our so-called representatives, which you can see listed in full here, are actively working against the American people.

They are turning the United States into such a hellish police state that the world’s most infamous dictators would be green with envy.

Unsurprisingly, the top stories on Google News makes no mention of the atrocious attack on everything that America was built upon that is embodied by S.1867.

This legislation is clearly being minimized and marginalized in the press, as if it is some minor bill that will never be invoked in order to detain Americans indefinitely without charge or trial.

That is patently absurd and to assume such would be nothing short of ignorant to an extreme degree, given that the American government utilizes every single possible method to exploit, oppress and assault Americans who stand up for their rights.
Furthermore, the Senators who voted against S.Amdt.1126, the amendment to S.1867 which would have limited “the authority of the Armed Forces to detain citizens of the United States under section 1031” should be considered traitorous criminals of the highest order, not to say that all 97 of those who voted for S.1867 are any better.

These Senators are not only defying their oath of office in waging war on the Constitution, they are also fighting to destroy the most critical rights we have in this country and in doing so are desecrating everything that our forefathers gave up their lives for.

Instead of British troops patrolling the streets in their red coats, it will be American soldiers who have the authority to detain you forever without a shred of evidence if they decide you’re a terrorist or supporting any organization affiliated with al Qaeda.

How they define that is anyone’s guess, but given that the entire interpretation of the PATRIOT Act is regarded as a state secret, we can assume that we will never even get to know.

Moreover, the fact that no charges or trial are needed under S.1867, the government needs no proof of supporting, planning, or committing terrorism whatsoever.

Since no evidence will ever be presented given that no trial or charges will ever be filed, they need not worry about that pesky thing called habeus corpus or anything resembling evidence of any kind.

All they need to do is declare that you’re an enemy combatant and suddenly you’re eligible to be snatched up by military thugs and locked away never to see the light of day again.

As far as I have seen, there are no detailed requirements set forth in the bill which have to be met before the military can indefinitely detain, and torture (or conduct “enhanced interrogation” if you’d prefer the government’s semantic work-around), Americans and people around the world.

What is stopping them from creating accounts for Americans who are actively resisting the fascistic police state corporatocracy which our once free nation has become on some jihadi website and using it has justification to claim these individuals are involved with terrorists?

What is stopping them from manufacturing any flimsy piece of evidence they can point to, even though they never actually have to present it or have it questioned in a court of law, in order to round up American dissidents?

The grim answer to these disturbing questions is: nothing. I regret having to say such a disheartening thing about the United States of America, a country I once thought was the freest nation in the world, but it is true.

I must emphasize once again that our government considers even ideology and protest to be a low level act of terrorism, so if you’re anti-war, pro-peace, pro-human rights, pro-justice, anti-corruption, or even worse, if you’re like me and expose the criminal government in Washington that supports terrorism while criminalizing American citizens, you very well might be labeled a terrorist.

Keep in mind that the House sister bill, H.R.1540, was passed with a 322-96 vote on May 26th, now all that is stopping this ludicrous from utterly eliminating the Bill of Rights is resolving the differences which will be done by the following appointed conferees: Levin; Lieberman; Reed; Akaka; Nelson NE; Webb; McCaskill; Udall CO; Hagan; Begich; Manchin; Shaheen; Gillibrand; Blumenthal; McCain; Inhofe; Sessions; Chambliss; Wicker; Brown MA; Portman; Ayotte; Collins; Graham; Cornyn; Vitter.
Unsurprisingly, not a single person who voted against S.1867 is included in that list.

I do not hesitate in saying that what our so-called representatives have done is an act of treason that represents the single most dangerous move ever made by our government.

Every single square inch of the United States is now a war zone and you or I could easily be declared soldiers on the wrong side of the war and treated as such.

No proof, no charges, and no trial are required. They do not even have to draw spurious links to terrorist organizations in order to indefinitely detain you as they could easily declare the evidence critical to national security and thus withhold it for as long as they please.

I will continue to hope that Obama decides to go against every single thing he has done after being sworn in but I think the chances are so slim that it is almost delusional to believe that he will do this.

After all, the only reason his administration is opposing it is because it doesn’t give the executive enough power, not because it strips away every legal protection we have.

If this is not the most laughably illegitimate reason to oppose the attack on all Americans that is S.1867, I don’t know what is.
The most important question that remains unanswered, for which I am not sure that I have a viable solution, is: how do we stop this? Is there any way we can bring down a criminal government packed to the brim with traitorous co-conspirators in a just, peaceful manner?

After all, if the American people resort to violence, we are no better than those bloodthirsty members of our armed forces and law enforcement who kill and beat human beings around our nation and the world with impunity.

However, if our military and police forces realize that at any moment they too could be deemed enemy combatants and treated like subhuman scum and thus decide to refuse all unlawful orders and arrest the real terrorists in Washington, we might be able to reinstate the rule of law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights which once defined our nation.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with your ideas, comments and information for future articles on this subject and any other issue for that matter. You can get in touch with me directly at Admin@EndtheLie.com and hopefully I will be able to read and respond if I’m not deemed an enemy combatant and shipped off to a CIA black site to be tortured into confessing to killing the

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in 1914.

Originally Appeared at End the Lie

THE UNITED STATES GULAG GESTAPO OF THE IRON CURTAIN !!!

MTV WARNINGS !!!! – National Defense Authorization Act S.1867

INDEFENITE DETENTION – NDAA !!!

SO YOU DO NOT THINK THIS CAN HAPPEN IN AMERICA ? IT ALREADY HAS, SEE LAST VIDEO @ BOTTOM OF PAGE 1942 WW2 !!!


OPERATION GARDEN PLOT !!!


REX 84 – MARTIAL LAW !!!

Senators Demand Military Lock Up Americans in “Battlefield” Defined as Outside Your Window

POLICE STATE ENOUGH YET – IMPERIAL EMPIRE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX WARS PROFITEERS !!!! FEMA CAMPS !!!

Chris Anders
ACLU
November 25, 2011

While nearly all Americans head to family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, the Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.

Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians 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. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. 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.
The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And 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?

The answer on why now is nothing more than election season politics. The White House, the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney General have all said that the indefinite detention provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act are harmful and counterproductive. The White House has even threatened a veto. But Senate politics has propelled this bad legislation to the Senate floor.

But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.

In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in.

In response to proponents of the indefinite detention legislation who contend that the bill “applies to American citizens and designates the world as the battlefield,” and that the “heart of the issue is whether or not the United States is part of the battlefield,” Sen. Udall disagrees, and says that we can win this fight without worldwide war and worldwide indefinite detention.

The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown. That is an extreme position that will forever change our country.

Now is the time to stop this bad idea. Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

US CONCENTRATION CAMPS OF 1942 IN AMERICA !!!

The William Lewis Films/Gary Franchi production opens with newsreel footage from the World War II era explaining the internment of Japanese Americans. At that time, the facilities were not referred to as “FEMA camps” (for those with questions, research REX 84), but were called War Relocation communities, as there was no Federal Emergency Management Agency at the time. What is revealed by the first two minutes of the film, however, is that of those relocated to these “communities,” more than two-thirds were American citizens, a fact that sets the stage for the rest of the well-documented film.

WANT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT FEMA CONCENTRATION CAMPS IN AMERICA LINK: