No Joke …This is What The ACLU Received From The Government On Text Surveillance Policy: Fifteen Pages Of Black Squares

No Joke…This is What the ACLU Received from the Government on Text Surveillance Policy (Liberty Blitzkrieg, May 9, 2013):

Fifteen pages of black squares.  How’s that freedom tasting?  Take that terrorists!

Most. Transparent. Ever.

ACLU

IRS: We Do Not Need Warrants To Read People’s Emails

IRS: We can read emails without warrant (The Hill, April 10, 2013):

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has claimed that agents do not need warrants to read people’s emails, text messages and other private electronic communications, according to internal agency documents.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act request, released the information on Wednesday.

In a 2009 handbook, the IRS said the Fourth Amendment does not protect emails because Internet users “do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such communications.” A 2010 presentation by the IRS Office of General Counsel reiterated the policy.

Read moreIRS: We Do Not Need Warrants To Read People’s Emails

Just Say NO: Seattle Residents Kill the City’s Drone Program

Just Say NO: Seattle Residents Kill the City’s Drone Program (Liberty Blitzkrieg, Feb 19, 2013):

The anti-surveillance state movement is gaining traction and following Charlottesville, Virginia becoming the first city to pass anti-drone legislation, the engaged citizenry of Seattle have now succeeded in killing their city’s own drone program earlier this month.  On the state level, while legislation has been introduced in several places, it appears Florida is closest to enacting domestic surveillance drone regulations into law.  The title of the bill is the “Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act.”

From Forbes:

Read moreJust Say NO: Seattle Residents Kill the City’s Drone Program

Goodbye Fourth Amendment: Homeland Security Affirms ‘Suspicionless’ Confiscation Of Devices Along Border

Goodbye Fourth Amendment: Homeland Security Affirms “Suspicionless” Confiscation Of Devices Along Border (ZeroHedge, Feb 9, 2013):

Slowly but surely the administration is making sure that both the US constitution, and its various amendments, become a thing of the past. In the name of national security, of course. And while until now it was the First and Second amendments that were the target of the administration’s ongoing efforts to eavesdrop on anyone, all the time, in order to decide who may be a domestic terrorist and thus fit for ‘droning’, coupled with an aggressive push to disarm and curtail the propagation of weapons in what some perceive is nothing more than an attempt to take away a population’s one recourse to defend itself against a tyrannical government, the time may be coming to say goodbye to the Fourth amendment – the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures – next. But only in close proximity to the border at first. According to Wired, “the Department of Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog has concluded that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever — all in the name of national security.”

More on America’s quest, by a very select few, to one by one extinguish its civil liberties from Wired:

The DHS, which secures the nation’s border, in 2009 announced that it would conduct a “Civil Liberties Impact Assessment” of its suspicionless search-and-seizure policy pertaining to electronic devices “within 120 days.” More than three years later, the DHS office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties published a two-page executive summary of its findings.

Read moreGoodbye Fourth Amendment: Homeland Security Affirms ‘Suspicionless’ Confiscation Of Devices Along Border

DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border … ‘Fourth-Amendment-Free Zone Stretches 100 Miles Inland’

DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border (Wired, Feb 8, 2013):

The Department of Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog has concluded that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever — all in the name of national security.

The DHS, which secures the nation’s border, in 2009 announced that it would conduct a “Civil Liberties Impact Assessment” of its suspicionless search-and-seizure policy pertaining to electronic devices “within 120 days.” More than three years later, the DHS office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties published a two-page executive summary of its findings.

“We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” the executive summary said.

The memo highlights the friction between today’s reality that electronic devices have become virtual extensions of ourselves housing everything from e-mail to instant-message chats to photos and our papers and effects — juxtaposed against the government’s stated quest for national security.

The President George W. Bush administration first announced the suspicionless, electronics search rules in 2008. The President Barack Obama administration followed up with virtually the same rules a year later. Between 2008 and 2010, 6,500 persons had their electronic devices searched along the U.S. border, according to DHS data.

According to legal precedent, the Fourth Amendment — the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures — does not apply along the border. By the way, the government contends the Fourth-Amendment-Free Zone stretches 100 miles inland from the nation’s actual border.

Read moreDHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border … ‘Fourth-Amendment-Free Zone Stretches 100 Miles Inland’

Justice Department ‘COMPLIES’ With FOIA Request For GPS Tracking Memos; Hands ACLU 111 TOTALLY BLACK Pages

Justice Department ‘Complies’ With FOIA Request For GPS Tracking Memos; Hands ACLU 111 Fully Redacted Pages (TechDirt, Jan 17,2013)

Obama Regime Wins Fight To Keep Drone Killings Of Americans Secret

From the article:

‘The public has a right to know more about the circumstances in which the government believes it can lawfully kill people, including US citizens, who are far from any battlefield and have never been charged with a crime.’


White House wins fight to keep drone killings of Americans secret (RT, Jan 2, 2013):

A federal judge issued a 75-page ruling on Wednesday that declares that the US Justice Department does not have a legal obligation to explain the rationale behind killing Americans with targeted drone strikes.

United States District Court Judge Colleen McMahon wrote in her finding this week that the Obama administration was largely in the right by rejecting Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and The New York Times for materials pertaining to the use of unmanned aerial vehicles to execute three US citizens abroad in late 2011 [pdf].

Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, both US nationals with alleged ties to al-Qaeda, were killed on September 30 of that year using drone aircraft; days later, al-Awlaki’s teenage son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was executed in the same manner. Although the Obama administration has remained largely quiet about the killings in the year since, a handful of statements made from senior White House officials, including Pres. Barack Obama himself, have provided some but little insight into the Executive Branch’s insistence that the killings were all justified and constitutionally-sound. Attempts from the ACLU and the Times via FOIA requests to find out more have been unfruitful, though, which spawned a federal lawsuit that has only now been decided in court.

Read moreObama Regime Wins Fight To Keep Drone Killings Of Americans Secret

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Plea To Ban Taping Of Police In Illinois

Supreme Court rejects plea to ban taping of police in Illinois (Chicago Tribune, Nov 26, 2012):

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal of a controversial Illinois law prohibiting people from recording police officers on the job.

By passing on the issue, the justices left in place a federal appeals court ruling that found that the state’s anti-eavesdropping law violates free-speech rights when used against people who audiotape police officers.

Read moreU.S. Supreme Court Rejects Plea To Ban Taping Of Police In Illinois

All Your Private Data Are Belong To Obama

All Your Private Data Are Belong To Obama (ZeroHedge, Sep 28, 2012):

When it comes to spying, eavesdropping on its citizens as well as the complete invasion of American privacy, the first thing that comes to mind is the Patriot ACT and Dubya. And with good reason: because while the rest of the world may “hate us for our freedoms”, they certainly love us for the fact that the NSA usually can autocomplete sentences before they are written in any electronic medium (recall: NSA Whistleblower Speaks Live: “The Government Is Lying To You“). However, as it turns out that the first thing that should be coming to mind is none other than the current administration and Barack Obama. Here are the facts: as the ACLU reveals using documents released by the Justice Department following months of litigation, “federal law enforcement agencies are increasingly monitoring Americans’ electronic communications, and doing so without warrants, sufficient oversight, or meaningful accountability.” How “increasingly”? Look at the chart below and decide.

From the ACLU: Between 20909 and 2011 “the number of people whose telephones were the subject of pen register and trap and trace surveillance more than tripled. In fact, more people were subjected to pen register and trap and trace surveillance in the past two years than in the entire previous decade.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

This is how Uncle Sam spies on you:

Read moreAll Your Private Data Are Belong To Obama

U.S. Supreme Court To Rule On Legality Of Wiretapping Through FISA

Supreme Court to rule on legality of wiretapping through FISA (RT, Sep 19, 2012):

The fight to stop the government’s sweeping surveillance of emails and phone calls will go all the way to the Supreme Court. The ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging the warrantless wiretapping provisions included under the FISA Amendment Acts.

The US House of Representative voted last week to reauthorize the 2008 amendments added to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, that allow for blanketing surveillance and eavesdropping of any communication suspected to be sent outside of the United States. Under the FISA Amendment Act (FAA), the government is granted the power to peer into the inboxes of any American and listen in on long-distance calls without ever requiring a judge’s approval. Pending approval from the Senate, the FAA will be renewed this year and be left on the books for another five years. The American Civil Liberties Union is adamantly opposed, however, and has asked the highest court in America to intervene.

On Monday, attorneys with the ACLU filed a brief (.pdf) with the Supreme Court challenging FISA and the FAA in hopes of keeping the feds from further snooping on message assumed to be private but made open to the National Security Agency with little oversight into their endeavors. The claim was filed on behalf of plaintiffs composed of human rights activists, attorneys, journalists and others opposed to the act “whose work requires them to engage in sensitive and sometimes privileged telephone and e-mail communications with people located outside the U.S,” the ACLU explains.

“Under the FAA, the government can target anyone — human rights researchers, academics, attorneys, political activists, journalists — simply because they are foreigners outside the United States, and in the course of its surveillance it can collect Americans’ communications with those individuals,” the ACLU writes in the brief.

Read moreU.S. Supreme Court To Rule On Legality Of Wiretapping Through FISA

ACLU Sues CIA Over Drone Killings

CIA sued over drone killings (RT, Sep 20, 2012):

The American Civil Liberties Union is taking the CIA to court for the agency’s refusal to comply with a FOIA request to hand over documents about the Obama administration’s “targeted killing” drone program.

The CIA claims its drone program is “secret,” even though President Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and senior government officials have publicly spoken about the program. In May, the New York Times found that President Obama personally oversees a drone “kill list,” using the weapon to target and kill terrorists abroad and often cause fatalities to bystanders near the target. But the CIA considers all military-age males killed in a strike zone to be “combatants,” the Times found.

The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in January 2010 asking the government to disclose “its use of predator drones to conduct ‘targeted killings’ overseas,” but the CIA refused to confirm or deny any information regarding the drones.

The CIA cannot deny the existence of the government’s targeted killing program and refuse to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests about the program while officials continue to make public statements about it,” the ACLU wrote in a press release.

Read moreACLU Sues CIA Over Drone Killings

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts: Putin Is Demonized While Democracy Fails In Amerika

From the article:

Obama is a despicable patsy, a front man for powerful private interests, and Democrats should be totally ashamed to have elevated such a cowardly lowlife. But as awful as Obama is, a vote for Republicans is a vote for Hitler or Stalin. Indeed, the election of Romney and Ryan would be worse than either.


Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

paul-craig-roberts
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Putin Is Demonized While Democracy Fails In Amerika (Paul Craig Roberts, Aug 30, 2012):

The latest “rights group” to jump on Russia’s President Putin about Pussy Riot is RootsAction. Following the propaganda line that Washington has established, RootsAction’s appeal for money and petition signers states that the three Russian women were sentenced to two years in prison “for the ‘crime’ of performing a song against Russia’s president Vladimir Putin in a Moscow church.”

This statement is a propagandistic misrepresentation of the offense for which the women were tried and convicted.

Read moreDr. Paul Craig Roberts: Putin Is Demonized While Democracy Fails In Amerika

The Program: A 32-Year NSA Veteran Speaks Out On Top Secret Domestic Spying Program ‘Stellar Wind’ (Video)

Watch the video HERE.

The Program (New York Times, Aug 22, 2012):

It took me a few days to work up the nerve to phone William Binney. As someone already a “target” of the United States government, I found it difficult not to worry about the chain of unintended consequences I might unleash by calling Mr. Binney, a 32-year veteran of the National Security Agency turned whistle-blower. He picked up. I nervously explained I was a documentary filmmaker and wanted to speak to him. To my surprise he replied: “I’m tired of my government harassing me and violating the Constitution. Yes, I’ll talk to you.”

Two weeks later, driving past the headquarters of the N.S.A. in Maryland, outside Washington, Mr. Binney described details about Stellar Wind, the N.S.A.’s top-secret domestic spying program begun after 9/11, which was so controversial that it nearly caused top Justice Department officials to resign in protest, in 2004.

“The decision must have been made in September 2001,” Mr. Binney told me and the cinematographer Kirsten Johnson. “That’s when the equipment started coming in.” In this Op-Doc, Mr. Binney explains how the program he created for foreign intelligence gathering was turned inward on this country. He resigned over this in 2001 and began speaking out publicly in the last year. He is among a group of N.S.A. whistle-blowers, including Thomas A. Drake, who have each risked everything — their freedom, livelihoods and personal relationships — to warn Americans about the dangers of N.S.A. domestic spying.

Read moreThe Program: A 32-Year NSA Veteran Speaks Out On Top Secret Domestic Spying Program ‘Stellar Wind’ (Video)

Pentagon, CIA Sued For Lethal Drone Attacks On U.S. Citizens

Pentagon, CIA Sued for Lethal Drone Attacks on U.S. Citizens (Wired, July 18, 2012):

Survivors of three Americans killed by targeted drone attacks in Yemen last year sued top-ranking members of the United States government, alleging Wednesday they illegally killed the three, including a 16-year-old boy, in violation of international human rights law and the U.S. Constitution.

“The government has killed three Americans. It should account for its actions. This case gives us an opportunity to do that,” Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director with the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a press call.

The suit, (.pdf) being litigated by the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights, seeks unspecified damages and highlights the government’s so-called unmanned drone “targeted killing” program that the ACLU and the center maintain have killed thousands, including hundreds of innocent bystanders overseas.

The suit, the first of its kind, alleges the United States was not engaged in an armed conflict with or within Yemen, prohibiting the use of lethal force unless “at the time it is applied, lethal force is a last resort to protect against a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury.” The case directly challenges the government’s decision to kill Americans without judicial scrutiny.

Read morePentagon, CIA Sued For Lethal Drone Attacks On U.S. Citizens

Top DNA Researcher: Patenting Human Genes Is ‘Lunacy’

From the very beginning of genetic research and modification, it was obvious that it would only be a matter of time before a claim would be staked on the very programming of human life by governments or international corporations. Unfortunately, that day has finally come with the recent patent of two human genes by Myriad Genetics.
The two genes being targeted by Myriad are BRCA1 and BRCA2 and they have already been the subject of several court rulings and a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Some scientists are claiming that these genes provide a link to “hereditary” breast or ovarian cancer. Yet, considering the history of corporations and the advantages they would gain by “owning” the DNA of a species (particularly of the human variety), we can safely assume that there is another agenda afoot which is concerned with more than mere science and development.
With that in mind, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit directed against Myriad Genetics aimed at challenging their claim to the human genes. Interestingly enough, this lawsuit is also working its way through the U.S. Court of Appeals for a second time.

AND NOW: Police Drones To Be Armed With Rubber Bullets And Tear Gas

Groups Concerned Over Arming Of Domestic Drones (CBS, May 23, 2012):

WASHINGTON (CBSDC) – With the use of domestic drones increasing, concern has not just come up over privacy issues, but also over the potential use of lethal force by the unmanned aircraft.

Drones have been used overseas to target and kill high-level terror leaders and are also being used along the U.S.-Mexico border in the battle against illegal immigration. But now, these drones are starting to be used domestically at an increasing rate.

The Federal Aviation Administration has allowed several police departments to use drones across the U.S. They are controlled from a remote location and use infrared sensors and high-resolution cameras.

Chief Deputy Randy McDaniel of the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office in Texas told The Daily that his department is considering using rubber bullets and tear gas on its drone.

Read moreAND NOW: Police Drones To Be Armed With Rubber Bullets And Tear Gas

CISPA Passes The House; Epic Privacy Battle Moves To The Senate

CISPA passes the House; epic privacy battle moves to the Senate (Natural News, April 30, 2012):

If you’re not familiar with “Washingtonspeak” – that odd, unique variance of the English language in which words don’t really mean what they are supposed to mean – you might not know that the lawmakers who wrote the new Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) aren’t really too concerned about the protection aspect of the legislation, at least as it applies to the general public’s concern about privacy.

Yes, the word “protection” is in the title, but a closer examination of the language of the bill, as well as its intent, by those who know how things works on Capitol Hill, find that the only “protection” the bill offers is that afforded the federal government.

According to a summary of the bill by the Congressional Research Service, the legislation amends “the National Security Act of 1947 to add provisions concerning cyber threat intelligence and information sharing.” In particular, cyber threat intelligence is defined “as information in the possession of an element of the intelligence community directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity […]”

What that means, essentially, is that it will be easier for the government and the private sector to share information about cyber threats, which, truthfully, is a major emerging national security problem.

Making conditions ripe for privacy violations – again

Read moreCISPA Passes The House; Epic Privacy Battle Moves To The Senate

CISPA Passes House With Amendments Which Make It Even Worse Than It Already Was

Related info:

Here Is The List Of Traitors In The House of Representatives Who Voted For CISPA


CISPA passes the House with amendments which make it even worse than it was (End The Lie, April 27, 2012):

Brent Daggett previously reported on how dangerous CISPA really is for End the Lie and I have pointed out how over 3,000,000 businesses across the United States – including companies like Google who opposed SOPA – expressed their support for the bill, which likely played a large role in its passage.

It passed with a 248-168 vote and quite unfortunately, the amended version which was voted on is even worse than it was originally, if you can believe that.

While I thought such a thing would never be possible, indeed the final version of CISPA is considerably more dangerous than the previous incarnations.

Read moreCISPA Passes House With Amendments Which Make It Even Worse Than It Already Was

CISPA Bill To Obliterate Privacy Laws Under Guise of Cybersecurity, A Blank Check of Privacy Invasion

Related info:

SOPA Mutates Into Much Worse CISPA, The Latest Threat To Internet Free Speech


CISPA Bill To Obliterate Privacy Laws Under Guise of Cybersecurity, A Blank Check of Privacy Invasion (Hot Hardware, April 26, 2012):

There’s a bill currently up for debate in the US House of Representatives that would give companies and government agencies the right to share information when issues of cybersecurity were at stake. If the first thing you thought after reading that was “Wait, don’t we already do this,” the answer is “Yes, we do.” The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is drawing fire for certain provisions that drastically expand the definition of what data can be shared and for the way they handle existing data protections.

Read moreCISPA Bill To Obliterate Privacy Laws Under Guise of Cybersecurity, A Blank Check of Privacy Invasion

ACLU: ‘A Slick Trick On The NDAA And Indefinite Detention; Don’t Be Fooled!’

A Slick Trick on the NDAA and Indefinite Detention; Don’t Be Fooled! (ACLU, April 19 2012):

It looks like there is slick little trick brewing in Congress. Supporters of locking people up without charge or trial are getting ready to play yet another trick on the American people.

Late yesterday, Congressman Scott Rigell and 26 other members of Congress introduced a bill, H.R. 4388, which he is trying to sell to the American people as a “fix” for the National Defense Authorization Act. But in fact, it is a useless bill that might actually end up causing harm.

That’s right. The plan in the House of Representatives seems to be to try to fool Americans into thinking that they are fixing the indefinite detention problems with the NDAA and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, when in fact, they are doing nothing good.

Don’t be fooled!

Here’s how they hope their trick will work. H.R. 4388, which was sneakily mistitled as the “Right to Habeas Corpus Act,” states that no one in the United States will lose their habeas rights under the NDAA. That might sound like something good, but it’s meaningless.

The question with the NDAA was never whether habeas rights are lost. Instead, the question is whether and when any president can order the military to imprison a person without charge or trial. The NDAA did not take away habeas rights from anyone, but it did codify a dangerous indefinite detention without charge or trial scheme. And nothing in the proposed bill by Rigell would change it. The Rigell bill won’t stop any president from ordering the military lockup of civilians without charge or trial.

And there’s more. Not only is it a useless bill, but it could end up causing harm too. It doesn’t accurately and fully list who is entitled to habeas (for example, it doesn’t even mention American citizens traveling outside the country), which could end up causing confusion.

They are hoping you will fall for their trick and waste all your time and energy on something meaningless — and not fight for legislation that actually protects people from indefinite detention without charge or trial.

They are hoping you will ignore the bills that actually are first steps towards fixing the NDAA. Congressman Adam Smith and Sen. Mark Udall introduced H.R. 4192/S. 2175, which codifies a ban on the military imprisoning civilians without charge or trial or trying persons before military commissions within the United States, as well as repeals section 1022 of last year’s NDAA. Also, Congressman Ron Paul has sponsored H.R. 3785, which repeals section 1021 of the NDAA. Both are meaningful first steps towards fixing a problem.

Supporters of last year’s NDAA indefinite detention provisions hope you will fall for their trick. They want you to spend your time pushing for the Rigell bill, instead of working on something meaningful. For more information about our opposition to the bill, you can read the letter that we sent to congressional offices earlier this week. Retweet our tweet to Rigell to tell him to stop playing games with indefinite detention without charge or trial.

Read moreACLU: ‘A Slick Trick On The NDAA And Indefinite Detention; Don’t Be Fooled!’

Ron Paul Fights To Repeal The NDAA That Allows Indefinite Detention For Americans

Update:

Ron Paul ‘Did Not Vote’ Against NDAA – NDAA Voting Record


Ron Paul fights indefinite detention of Americans (RT, Jan. 19, 2012):

Ron Paul took a day off from the campaign trail on Wednesday, not to pause from politics, but to urge his colleagues on Capitol Hill to overturn the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that allows indefinite detention for Americans.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, or the NDAA, was inked by President Barack Obama on New Year’s Eve, despite immense opposition from Americans who were concerned by vague language that could allow the commander-in-chief to use military forces to domestically police the United States. Under Section 1021 of the NDAA, any person, US citizen or not, can be held without trial by American armed forces if they are suspected of being engaged in hostilities against the country by al-Qaeda or associated forces.

Read moreRon Paul Fights To Repeal The NDAA That Allows Indefinite Detention For Americans

Occupied America: Senate Bill 1867 Would Allow US Military To Detain And Murder Anti-Government Protesters In American Cities

Occupied America: Senate bill 1867 would allow U.S. military to detain and murder anti-government protesters in American cities (Natural News, Dec. 01, 2011):

I don’t know if you’re all getting this through your heads yet, but Senate Bill 1867 — the National Defense Authorization Act — would openly “legalize” the U.S. government’s detainment and murder of OWS protesters and the assassination of talk show hosts, bloggers, journalists and anyone who holds a so-called “anti-government” point of view. This is the open and blatant declaration of war against any who do not going along with TSA thugs reaching down your pants, the Goldman Sachs economic takeover of nations, the secret arrest and torture of American citizens, and other acts of outright tyranny waged by an out-of-control government.

Those who have been burying their heads in the sand over the coming police state need to wake up and face the music. That U.S. Senators would knowingly and willfully attempt to pass a bill that legalizes the indefinite detainment, torture and killing of American citizens with no due process whatsoever — and on American soil! — is nothing less than a traitorous betrayal of the once-free American people. These are, our founding fathers would have said, acts of war against the People. They reveal the insidious plan to put in place a legal framework to end the Bill of Rights, murder protesters, and overrun America with total police state brutality.

And yet the sheeple are still asleeple

I grow weary of trying to warn the American people to wake up and see what is now right in front of their eyes, so for those who want to read these words themselves — right in the Senate bill — you can read it at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query…

And YES, it has now been confirmed that the indefinite detainment and murder provisions do apply to American citizens on the streets of American cities. As Sen. Lindsey Graham explained in plain language on the Senate floor: “…1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”

That means America, for those of you who are still wondering what “homeland” means. It’s a phrase borrowed from Nazi Germany, of course, which is the source of much of this legislation as you might have noticed.

Read moreOccupied America: Senate Bill 1867 Would Allow US Military To Detain And Murder Anti-Government Protesters In American Cities

Senate Bill Would Allow US Military To Indefinitely Detain Americans Without Charge Or Trial Anywhere In The World

Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial (InfoWars, Nov. 28, 2011):

NDAA detention provision would turn America into a “battlefield”

The Senate is set to vote on a bill today that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard 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. 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,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.

Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor this week, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.

The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing. The language appears in sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA bill.

Read moreSenate Bill Would Allow US Military To Indefinitely Detain Americans Without Charge Or Trial Anywhere In The World

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts: The Day America Died – The Only Future For Americans Is A Nightmare

“What good fortune for governments that the people do not think.”
– Adolf Hitler

“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death.”
– Adolf Hitler

“By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.”
– Adolf Hitler

See also:

The Secret Memo That Explains Why President Obama Can Kill Americans Without Due Process


Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

paul-craig-roberts
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

“To expect salvation from an election is delusional. All you can do, if you are young enough, is to leave the country. The only future for Americans is a nightmare.”

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts: The Day America Died: The only Future for Americans is a Nightmare:

Some of us have watched this day approach and have warned of its coming, only to be greeted with boos and hisses from “patriots” who have come to regard the US Constitution as a device that coddles criminals and terrorists and gets in the way of the President who needs to act to keep us safe.

In our book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, Lawrence Stratton and I showed that long before 9/11 US law had ceased to be a shield of the people and had been turned into a weapon in the hands of the government. The event known as 9/11 was used to raise the executive branch above the law. As long as the President sanctions an illegal act, executive branch employees are no longer accountable to the law that prohibits the illegal act. On the president’s authority, the executive branch can violate US laws against spying on Americans without warrants, indefinite detention, and torture and suffer no consequences.

Many expected President Obama to re-establish the accountability of government to law. Instead, he went further than Bush/Cheney and asserted the unconstitutional power not only to hold American citizens indefinitely in prison without bringing charges, but also to take their lives without convicting them in a court of law. Obama asserts that the US Constitution notwithstanding, he has the authority to assassinate US citizens, who he deems to be a “threat,” without due process of law.

In other words, any American citizen who is moved into the threat category has no rights and can be executed without trial or evidence.

Read moreDr. Paul Craig Roberts: The Day America Died – The Only Future For Americans Is A Nightmare