jump to last post 1-12 of 12 discussions (25 posts)

NDAA-descent into totalitarianism

  1. SparklingJewel profile image65
    SparklingJewelposted 5 years ago

    incredible! can't believe this has happened...wake up America, this is no nightmare

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop … itarianism

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I'm with you on this one, SJ.

  2. Moderndayslave profile image59
    Moderndayslaveposted 5 years ago

    I don't see anything about this coming from the MSM, therefore most people don't know anything about this. Just mention terrorism and the people that aren't paying attention are like "Good,Good, Good, My government is protecting me" At this point ,I don't feel our president or our reps are steering this ship anyway.

  3. maxoxam41 profile image77
    maxoxam41posted 5 years ago

    We should have reacted earlier. The first infringement to our freedom was a sign. Either we protest and fight, either they continue. We did nothing, they are keeping their goals: the destitution of our rights.

  4. Moderndayslave profile image59
    Moderndayslaveposted 5 years ago
  5. Evan G Rogers profile image82
    Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago

    If you search CNN, you can't even find an article discussing Obama signing it.

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      That's one of the scariest parts of this whole thing to me - hardly anything about it on any major news outlet.

      1. EmpressFelicity profile image83
        EmpressFelicityposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        There's nothing in the UK mainstream media about it either, except in the Guardian... on their blog, not the main newspaper.

        It's weird.

  6. Reality Bytes profile image92
    Reality Bytesposted 5 years ago

    Goebells would be proud!!

  7. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago

    http://www.ginabellinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/entrepreneurial-sky-is-falling.png

    1. Reality Bytes profile image92
      Reality Bytesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/111222-namibia-hmed-4p.grid-6x2.jpg

      A strange metal ball dropped out of the sky and slammed into the remote grassland of northern Namibia recently, according to press reports.

      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45770560/ns … nce-space/

    2. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Gee, I dunno, Ron. Seems like this should be more important that the FLOTUS' new dress, and the MSM covered that. Or perhaps you're more fashion-conscious than I am. lol

      1. Reality Bytes profile image92
        Reality Bytesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        LOL  We also got to go Christmas shopping with the POTUS, watched him eat his pizza and all.  Oh what a vast supply of hungry journalists we currently possess.

        1. habee profile image90
          habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          For real...but they ignore NDAA.

  8. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago

    Keep watching the news.  You'll have reason to unclench your sphincters and move on to the next monster under your bed.

    1. EmpressFelicity profile image83
      EmpressFelicityposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      If Obama had been a Republican, would you be showing the same lack of concern?

      I'm genuinely curious, so I would be grateful for an actual answer to this question, not a brush-off.

      1. mom101 profile image60
        mom101posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Empress,

        Dem/Rep either way. Either/Or.   Either way, the ending is the same.

        The answer would probably be more than we could handle. It is a scary thing. The ideal answer to the problem would have been to stand up to it much earlier.

        I am unsure of many things about this bill. One, is it a done deal or is it just finding its way thru the channels? Secondly, is this just another election year scheme to hurt the other party? Many questions on this subject.

        If in fact it is a done deal, we are going to be seeing the change that was so loudly spouted last election season. I am afraid we aint gonna like it.

        We are however, a strong people. We CAN overcome it or at least make it through it.

        Life will no doubt be different. And like an earlier post showed, we may as well find a way to laugh about it cause crying is too late.

        If my understanding of the bill is correct, we are to have no more than a 7 day supply of food in our home, we can't talk among our friends about our likes or dislikes of the government, we can be detained indefinitely without trial until the war on terrorism is over, and that is just the start of it.

        I hope my understanding of this is totally wrong. I really do.

        When I ask people if they have heard about it, they look at me like, ok, if I smile, she will go away.

        If this is real, we NEED to be talking. Doing.  ETC.

        1. EmpressFelicity profile image83
          EmpressFelicityposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I don't know much about this NDAA bill but from what I can gather, two of the controversial bits are sections 1031 & 1032, which are on pages 359 - 364 of this humungously long pdf:

          http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s … 867pcs.pdf

          I'm not great at reading legal jargon but it seems to be talking about which groups of people should be put in military (as opposed to civilian) custody if arrested for terrorist activities. It excludes US citizens, but there is also a waiver.

          Of course, a lot of this hinges on what you mean by "war" and "hostilities". Handily for your (and my) government, the "war on terror" is an open-ended thing, which can go on indefinitely and can mean anything the government wants it to mean.

          Don't know anything about the being arrested for having seven days' food supply or talking about the government - can anyone find a link?

        2. poetvix profile image83
          poetvixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          This flies in the face of the Constitution as it takes away the right to a trial, to even have charges filed, allows for one to be held indefinitely so on and so forth.  At the same time, many are saying that speaking out is a form of such.  When one considers the fact that it says "for suspicion" not for having been proven that sheds a whole new light on all of this.  I heard someone say recently this won't stand if it goes against the Constitution.  Perhaps they are right and perhaps not.  Do we really want to leave the right to a trial for American citizens in the hands of anyone?  These rights were to be undisputed hence why they were put in place at our nation’s inception.  Further, according to what I have seen and read it allows for "enhanced interrogation methods", i.e. torture.  Reality Bytes gives us a link to a case of a 16 year old child detained.  Are we really at a point where we think all of this is appropriate and needed to stop children?!?  This child has been locked up for 2 months.  Do they really think we will buy that it takes that long to investigate the actions of a teenager?  This must be repealed.  Now!  The potential for abuse here is too high.  Protecting our nation should be priority one.  The question now becomes who we need protection from!

      2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Not at all.  If Obama was a Republican I would be very concerned.

        1. EmpressFelicity profile image83
          EmpressFelicityposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          So if a Republican president tinkers about with your freedoms, it's not OK. But if a Democrat president does the same thing, you post Chicken Little cartoons whenever anyone raises their concerns.

          OK, ta. At least I know where you're coming from (well, I'd already worked it out long ago, but hey).

  9. Reality Bytes profile image92
    Reality Bytesposted 5 years ago

    16 year old American Boy Indefinitely Detained


    http://youtu.be/1zO1Rar8kL4


    WELCOME TO THE POLICE STATE!

  10. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    NDAA- is the law of thieves.

  11. Cassie Smith profile image76
    Cassie Smithposted 5 years ago

    Now why is it that we don't hear anything about the controversial part of the NDAA from the nattering nabobs of negativism.  They sure squawked loudly when Bush signed the Patriot Act, or do they agree with this because Obama signed on to it.

  12. Evan G Rogers profile image82
    Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago

    If you're against these NDAA type pieces of legislation, then Ron Paul is your man.

 
working