NDAA - National Defense Authorization Act

[spacemaverick]

It saddens me to see my country headed in this direction. This message that is conveyed through the various avenues from the people in each of my entries above need to be spread far and wide. This needs to go viral if we have any chance of staving off any further erosion of our liberties. I am a veteran and soon to be retired law enforcement and I take constitutional liberties seriously.

I pledge that I will support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies both Foreign and DOMESTIC and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.

Wake up my friends!

[spacemaverick]

The National Defense Authorization Act is the Greatest Threat to Civil Liberties Americans Face

By Forbes

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain...mericans-face/


..."What’s truly at stake when we start talking about Big Government and such is far more dangerous and preposterous than high marginal tax rates.

We’re talking about the stripping away of our most basic freedoms. We’re talking about a potential state that can call me a terrorist for writing this blog post and then lock me up and throw away the key..."

Above taken from the article.

[murmur]

Marginalizing Ron Paul

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...paul_20111229/

As another recent example of Paul’s sanity on the national security issues that have led to a flight from reason on the part of politicians since the 9/11 attacks, I offer the Texan’s criticism this week of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The act would allow the president to order indeterminate military imprisonment without trial of those accused of supporting terrorism, a policy that Obama signed into law and Paul opposes, as the congressman did George W. Bush’s Patriot Act.



Paul said: “Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed.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 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. This is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system.” That was exactly the objection raised by The New York Times in its own excellent editorial challenging the constitutionality of the NDAA. It should not be difficult for those same editorial writers to treat Ron Paul as a profound and principled contributor to a much-needed national debate on the limits of federal power instead of attempting to marginalize his views beyond recognition.

================================================== =======================================


Right on !!!!!

I mean come on now.

It's time to take a stand.

If not now......when???

[spacemaverick]

@ murmur, If we do not attempt to spread the word like we are doing now, people are not going to really know what the NDAA really has contained within its substance. The NDAA is usually passed every year because it deals with the military budget. Only this time the part regarding military action against terrorism was changed to give the TPTB more power and pass the torch to the military to deal with the problem using tribunals. I think there will be a number of military people that will stand by their oaths and oppose this.

[murmur]

I think there will be a number of military people that will stand by their oaths and oppose this.

I hopefully agree....but I don't want to depend on that.

Time to take a stand now.....the internet won't be this free for much longer.