Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

lquadland10 (< 20)

Obama’s Signing Statement on NDAA: I have the power to detain Americans… but I won’tHappy New Year.

Recs

16

January 02, 2012 – Comments (9) | RELATED TICKERS: GS , JPM , XOM

So why should you buy oil gold and silver? Little know fact in the bill is England and the USA are attacking the Iran Central Bank. More sanctions. Oil by the end of 2012 should be around 200 dollars a barrel. Sush.... now. Be a good citizen of the State.Will we even to make it to elections? Still think I am crazy about the FEMA camps? 

http://www.infowars.com/president-obamas-ndaa-signing-statement-i-have-the-power-to-detain-americans-but-i-wont/

 

My Administration has worked tirelessly to reform or remove the provisions described above in order to facilitate the enactment of this vital legislation, but certain provisions remain concerning. My Administration will aggressively seek to mitigate those concerns through the design of implementation procedures and other authorities available to me as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, will oppose any attempt to extend or expand them in the future, and will seek the repeal of any provisions that undermine the policies and values that have guided my Administration throughout my time in office.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/31/statement-president-hr-1540

S. 1867 (NDAA): Secret Torture Provisions For Home Grown Terrorists

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0wpAcovRFk&feature=related

 

 

I like this guy. Oh and something on Newt.

Well it has come to this.So fools What now?Where do we go from here?I had such hope for 2012.I still do however it just got a lot harder. Oh well when the going gets tough the tough get going. Fool On. 

9 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On January 02, 2012 at 10:06 AM, devoish (98.57) wrote:

 lquadland,

Thank you for including a link to the Presidents description of the legislation handed to him for signing after a vote by both houses of Congress. I am going to repeat it here.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/31/statement-president-hr-1540 

I am also going to include a link to each Congressmans vote for those who are interested.

 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-932 

and each Senators.

 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-230 

In the House of Representatives, Democrat "no" votes outnumbered Republican "no: votes by more than 2:1.

Candidates for the Republican Presidential nomination Michelle Bachmann voted "yes" and Ron Paul did not express a position on the legislation by voting.  

Among the not voting was Democrat Gabrielle Giffords, but she is still recovering from being shot in the head.

Retiring Congressman Barney Frank, theoretically having no politicall advantage to gain or lose by his vote, recorded a "no".

Notable Republican leaders Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan voted "yes" 

Among the thirteen "no" votes in the Senate were Tea Party favorite Rand Paul, former comedian Al Franken, Independent/Socialist Bernie Sanders, and liberal Dennis Kucinich.

President Obama claims an earlier version of the bill gave the President even greater power to detain US citizens. President Obama promised Congress he would veto that version if they sent it to him.

Best wishes,

Steven 

 

Report this comment
#2) On January 02, 2012 at 1:50 PM, amassafortune (29.46) wrote:

Scary stuff. With no more than six degrees of separation and ever-increasing electronic and bio-tracking tools, it gets easier every day to tie any one person to another.

If you were thinking of cleaning up your social network accounts, anyway, here's a reason to de-friend people you don't know well.

In an era when states are reviewing their capital punishment statutes after DNA testing has revealed irreversible mistakes, there are still experts convincing leadership they can prevent crimes with their expertise, if only preemptive action can be legislated.

These waves of criminal predictability trends seem somehow like market waves. They may just both be tied to human nature. In the early 1900s anthropological criminology was in vogue. We had Japanese internment during WWII. In the 50s J. Edgar and McCarthy advocated prosecutions for political opinions.   

It seems odd that President Obama would sign this legislation. Then again, with extremely low ratings, boogeymen can be useful during an election year.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure most of those detained under this law will have been good targets, with either the intention to do harm, or supporting others with intent, but mistakes will be made. 

The law itself is pretty broad. Elements of justification in the proposal included an excess of seven days' worth of food and the presence of weapons and ammunition. The weapons criterion covers 45% of U.S. households. Having eight cans of beans or tuna in one's pantry adds millions to the pool. Woe to the prudent who still can food. 

Yes, there are real pockets of evil in this world, whether they be of the 9/11 variety, those who prey on alter boys, or those who have standing restraint orders against them across America. What keeps police in the U.S. from rounding up these usual suspects is the Constitutional requirement that a crime must be committed before freedom is revoked. The body, once detained, must be revealed, charges must be public, representation must be allowed or provided, prosecution must be swift, and punishment must be humane. 

With this legislation, we allow for continued weakening of the Geneva Convention protections for our own soldiers. Humane treatment since 1929 has been largely reciprocal and voluntary. One country's soldier is another country's enemy combatant. I understand my friends who believe legislation like this is a step toward greater safety. They visualize a 9/11-like event being prevented because of a waterboarded revelation that results in a detention that prevents an evil plan from unfolding.

Billy Bob Thornton's Sling Blade is one of my favorite movies. Character Karl Childers loses his freedom once for mistakenly identifying evil and acting against it. Conflicted by his understanding of the Bible, his down-to-earth sense of justice, and his intellectual limits, he preemptively acts against evil a second time, knowing he will permanently lose his own freedom as a result. This legislation allows small groups of individuals to make similar decisions with no personal downside risk. As we have seen in the market, once someone has protected the skin they have in the game, the game changes.

I support the 13 members who voted not to allow this legal bypass of Constitutional protections. History will lump this legislation in with internment camps, eventually. Meantime, good luck to business owners whose with names resemble those on the no-fly list. Your customers have one more reason to add a degree of separation between themselves and you. 

This law can be construed that we no longer believe we can protect ourselves without chipping away at the fundamental rights that make this country unique. This law has significant downside risk.    

  

Report this comment
#3) On January 02, 2012 at 1:52 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Yep. Thank you Steven. He said he would not sign it. He did. No wonder Iran is in an up roar. China and I think Russia and India backing Iran.I don't blame them.  I wonder when the next false flag will come and we bomb Iran.My theory and just a theory is maybe big ben in London will be hit. The banker gansters syndicate win again funding both sides. I am disappointed that Paul did not vote. Oh and if gas goes to 5.oo a gal what do you think about how occupy wall street will grow. Then will Obama start with this new law start using it on them? Not going to be pretty this year. Thank you for the links. Congress sold us out.

Report this comment
#4) On January 02, 2012 at 1:59 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Dear amas. Elements of justification in the proposal included an excess of seven days' worth of food and the presence of weapons and ammunition. The weapons criterion covers 45% of U.S. households. Having eight cans of beans or tuna in one's pantry adds millions to the pool. Woe to the prudent who still can food.

At this rate almost anyone in the USA qualifies. Left or right. Your take. Well lets just say that just bites and  when you said Don't get me wrong, I'm sure most of those detained under this law will have been good targets, with either the intention to do harm, or supporting others with intent, but mistakes will be made.  I think of tea party. Occupy wall street. Just about anyone. Now my mood is darker now. Need to lighten it up. I know. Wash dishes.

Report this comment
#5) On January 02, 2012 at 2:27 PM, drgroup (69.27) wrote:

Thank you for the insight and links. Very frightening, but real. I don't know if voting everyone in washington out of office would even begin to change this mess. It is to easy to be corrupt as a member of congress. Laws have to changed to reflect ways to stop this, but by whom?   

Report this comment
#6) On January 02, 2012 at 2:30 PM, drgroup (69.27) wrote:

Thank you for the insight and links. Very frightening, but real. I don't know if voting everyone in washington out of office would even begin to change this mess. It is to easy to be corrupt as a member of congress. Laws have to changed to reflect ways to stop this, but by whom?   

Report this comment
#7) On January 02, 2012 at 3:13 PM, amassafortune (29.46) wrote:

Mish has a good review of this legislation with a few more commentary links, plus a list of the 13 who voted against it.

It is refreshing that, in this era when so many votes are lockstep party votes, six Democrats and six Republicans broke ranks to put the Constitution above politics or the better safe than sorry vote. 

Mish links to video commentary by Rachel Maddow, John McCain, Rand Paul, and Larry Wilkerson.   

Report this comment
#8) On January 02, 2012 at 7:49 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Yes and now. While we were not looking.I am told that Senator Reid believes that he has the votes to quickly ram this measure through the U. S. Senate, while the American people aren't paying attention. I need you to act quickly to stop the kill switch. Save free speech on the internet. Please send faxes to Republican and Democrat Members of the U.S. Senate, and demand that they filibuster Senate Bill (S.) 968, the Senate version of the internet takeover bill.They have changed the Senate calendar in order to pass this bill immediately after they return from the Christmas holidays. The only way to stop them, or at least slow them down, is through a filibuster. This is really urgent. You must fax Members of the U. S. Senate NOW. How can we let people about the Occupied Wall Street or the Right or the left if we can't get internet access.http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/12/17/cloture-filed-on-the-motion-to-proceed-to-s-968-protect-ip/

Report this comment
#9) On January 02, 2012 at 7:51 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Yes and now. While we were not looking.I am told that Senator Reid believes that he has the votes to quickly ram this measure through the U. S. Senate, while the American people aren't paying attention. I need you to act quickly to stop the kill switch. Save free speech on the internet. Please send faxes to Republican and Democrat Members of the U.S. Senate, and demand that they filibuster Senate Bill (S.) 968, the Senate version of the internet takeover bill.They have changed the Senate calendar in order to pass this bill immediately after they return from the Christmas holidays. The only way to stop them, or at least slow them down, is through a filibuster. This is really urgent. You must fax Members of the U. S. Senate NOW. How can we let people about the Occupied Wall Street or the Right or the left if we can't get internet access.http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/12/17/cloture-filed-on-the-motion-to-proceed-to-s-968-protect-ip/

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement