Montanans Launch Recall of Senators Who Approved NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, US Senate

Montanans Launch Recall of Senators Who Approved NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, US Senate; Salem News

Moving quickly on Christmas Day after the US Senate voted 86 - 14 to pass the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA) which allows for the indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial, Montanans have announced the launch of recall campaigns against Senators Max Baucus and Jonathan Tester, who voted for the bill.

Montana is one of nine states with provisions that say that the right of recall extends to recalling members of its federal congressional delegation, pursuant to Montana Code 2-16-603, on the grounds of physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of certain felony offenses.

Section 2 of Montana Code 2-16-603 reads:

"(2) A public officer holding an elective office may be recalled by the qualified electors entitled to vote for the elective officer's successor."

Read the rest here.

BATTLEFIELD AMERICA

BATTLEFIELD AMERICA; Jonathan Emord; NewsWithViews.com

Senate Bill 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich) and John McCain (R-AZ), contains a provision that authorizes the armed forces to arrest and imprison without charge or trial those suspected of involvement in or support of terrorist organizations, including American citizens resident in the United States. Not since the summary detention of Asian Americans during the Second World War on suspicion of potential complicity with the Axis enemies of the United States has a law promised to violate in a more direct and profound manner the rights of the American people.


An amendment offered to eliminate this provision by Senator Rand Paul was defeated. The bill, containing this provision, passed the Senate on December 1 by a vote of 93 to 7. The bill and a comparable defense bill in the House, H.R. 1540, are in a House-Senate conference committee. If the provision survives negotiations between the House and the Senate, it will appear in a final bill headed for the President’s signature.


The history of modern government is rife with examples of the innocent accused. While none of us would favor a state that was less than vigilant in arresting and prosecuting American citizens for whom evidence reveals involvement in terrorist activities, no freedom loving American should accept on the pretext of the war on terror the wholesale and indefinite suspension of all Americans basic rights to Habeas Corpus, to Due Process under the Fifth Amendment, and to notice of the precise charges brought, to a speedy trial on the merits before an impartial judge, to a trial by jury, and to counsel--all guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.


Under Section 1031 of Senate Bill 1867, if your next door neighbor is merely accused of involvement in or support of some terrorist organization or suspected terrorist organization, military police are free to show up at his door, break it in, place him under arrest, and escort him to a military installation for indefinite incarceration without affording him the right of habeas corpus or a speedy trial on the merits before a jury in the federal judicial system. The power is not unlike that of the Gestapo. The law invites abuse beyond the obvious invasion of protected rights, because it can—like the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798—be used to eliminate political dissidents of one kind or another.


Consider this example. Let us assume that a person holds the loathsome view that al-Qaeda’s agenda for America is laudable and posts on a web site and in various other public fora that odious message. Let us also assume that this person while advocating destruction of our nation has kept his advocacy as an academic concept and has taken no step toward procuring weapons or other means to bring about that destruction. Under Section 1031(b)(2) of this bill, that person would be definable as one who supports al-Qaeda and would be eligible for summary military arrest and indefinite detention. There are no procedural safeguards in the bill to prevent that result.


We would all do well to remember the words of Thomas Jefferson in his First Inaugural Address, immediately following his successful efforts to secure the non-renewal of yet another great rights violating law, the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. That law forbad seditious libel, i.e., any statement critical of federal government officers or measures—a rank offense to the First Amendment. Jefferson gave us these words which apparently have no resonance in the ears of Carl Levin or John McCain: “If there be any among us who wish to dissolve this Union, or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated, where reason is left free to combat it.”


Read the rest here.

Former Senator Simpson says U.S. military spending outpaces totals from the next 14 largest nations, combined

Alan Simpson says U.S. military spending outpaces totals from the next 14 largest nations, combined: PolitiFact Ohio; The Cleveland Plain Dealer

Simpson wasn’t questioning the need for a strong military. His point was that the military budget had become so immense that it operated without restraint. To put it into perspective, he offered this remark:

"Our defense budget is larger than (the combined totals of the next) 14 major countries of the world -- and if you think all of it is there for national security purposes, you're terribly wrong."

Comment: This is happening because the puppet masters outside of our government deem that the US will be the policemen of the world and our Congress acquiesces. But have no fears, it will soon end. It will end when all our wealth as a nation is exhausted. Then our armed forces will come home to police us during the epoch of "austerity." You know austerity has done wonders for the Chinese.

Podcast: Quintiliani on SOPA and S. 1867

Host Brian Duffy interviewed long time Repeal the 17th Discussion Board contributor Dan Quintiliani concerning the current legislation being pushed in the US Senate, SOPA and S.1867, both of which have far reaching effects on civil liberties.

Listen to internet radio with repealtheseventeenth on Blog Talk Radio

Readings and Links related to this podcast:

• Congress endorsing military detention, a new AUMF 
• S.1867 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 
• Stop Online Piracy Act 
• PROTECT IP Act 
• X-Cop Fly Company

All But Seven Voted For This: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

This S 1867 passed in the Senate by roll call vote. The totals were 93 Ayes, 7 Nays.

Anyone out there that thinks there is such a thing as opposition parties is a fool. It is one party, one agenda, one endstate. We have made our prison and now we'll all live in it.

Indefinite Detention and the National Defense Authorization Act

Why aren't our Senators standing up [to] the President when he writes stuff like this:

The Administration objects to and has serious legal and policy concerns about many of the detainee provisions in the bill. In their current form, some of these provisions disrupt the Executive branch's ability to enforce the law and impose unwise and unwarranted restrictions on the U.S. Government's ability to aggressively combat international terrorism; other provisions inject legal uncertainty and ambiguity that may only complicate the military's operations and detention practices.
Section 1031 attempts to expressly codify the detention authority that exists under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) (the “AUMF”). The authorities granted by the AUMF, including the detention authority, are essential to our ability to protect the American people from the threat posed by al-Qa'ida and its associated forces, and have enabled us to confront the full range of threats this country faces from those organizations and individuals. Because the authorities codified in this section already exist, the Administration does not believe codification is necessary and poses some risk. After a decade of settled jurisprudence on detention authority, Congress must be careful not to open a whole new series of legal questions that will distract from our efforts to protect the country. While the current language minimizes many of those risks, future legislative action must ensure that the codification in statute of express military detention authority does not carry unintended consequences that could compromise our ability to protect the American people.

Repeal the 17th Amendment and our Senators will once again stand up for decentralized power, and they will enforce limits on the president and the rest of the federal government.