Chilling leap toward tyranny and dictatorship

[Roy.Minet]

I heard on the news last evening that Senators Carl Levin and John McCain are proposing legislation that would authorize the domestic use of US military forces, and that the POTUS could arrest and hold citizens without charges.  No details were provided, but it's hard to see how any details could make this proposal any less onerous.  WTF, this is the sort of thing we used to shake our heads at when it happened in third-world countries.  There should be a huge outcry and backlash at this proposal in the media and by the great majority of citizens.  The really scary thing is that (I bet) there won't be any major uproar; it'll just float out there like it's business as usual.

A large number of politicians seem to be addicted to use of military force anywhere and everywhere.  You would think that, having been a POW, McCain would be otherwise inclined, but he seems to be one of the worst.  What a gun slinger president he would have been.

[mark.d.crowley]

The DownsizeDC organization (founded by remnants of the Harry Browne campaigns) had an email release yesterday on this very topic (S.1867, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012).  Here’s a link to their page on this topic with their link to the detainee/abduction part of the legislation:

http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/urgent-indefinite-jailing-of-americans-and-others-get-it-worse

http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/the-rushed-detainee-provisions-of-ndaa

My read of Section 1032 says that if government thinks, wants to think or thinks it convenient that you did these or other acts real or imagined, it can take you without question and send you anywhere it wants.  I'm sure there's some internal review, but it wouldn't surprise me that it's modeled after that of Penn State's coaching staff.

Look at these words: "the requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States." I think it means that they're not required to send you, for example, to a foreign prison to be tortured, but they still can.  Is that what it means?

[mark.d.crowley]

And I just saw this link on the DrudgeReport:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/29/senate-defies-obama-veto-threat-terrorist-custody-/

Senate defies Obama veto threat in terrorist custody vote
The Washington Times
Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Defying a veto threat from President Obama, the Senate voted Tuesday to preserve language that would give the U.S. military a crack at al Qaeda operatives captured in the U.S., even if they are American citizens.

... senators voted 61-37 to preserve the language that gives the military custody of al Qaeda suspects, rather than turning them over to law enforcement officials.

The House has already passed its version with strict detainee language, so the Senate vote makes it likely whatever final bill reaches the president’s desk will contain the provision.

[GlennRobinson]

Both Toomey and Casey voted for it.

[Mik]

There is very little difference between the Democratic Party and the GOP.

[mark.d.crowley]

In the "Letters" part of this forum, Timothy had another fine letter that relates to the topic of this thread.  Here is the link to his letter:

http://www.lppa.org/smf/index.php?topic=36303.msg51156;topicseen#msg51156

[t1m0thy]

I made a video and dedicated a song to our two traitorous Senators from the state of Pennsylvania:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r801ox5yN_c

[mark.d.crowley]

This is becoming a hot topic.  The Pittsburgh Tribune Review had an editorial today on this:

Stealing your freedoms
Andrew P. Napolitano
Friday, December 2, 2011

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_769950.html

[Mik]

Nice Video, Tim, and a good editorial. We'll see if a veto comes. I am not holding my breath.

[matt_schutter]

I would say the senate put and act of war on the American people.  I called our 2 scum bags in their dc office and told them I WILL NOT COMPLY AND I TOLD THEM THEY VOTED FOR WAR ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. To those who thought I was nuts when I said at the convention that I believe the only way we will get liberty back is the gun NOW do you believe me our are going to wait for the military to come and pick you up to take you to the fema camps? It is more important now that we support Ron Paul in 2012 because if it is not revolution love it will be REVOLUTION BLOOD!

RON PAUL 2012

[Eviker]

Matt, when Republican Ron Paul goes on to his heavenly reward, the Libertarian Party will still be active promoting citizen liberty and limited government.  And we won't need to wade through rivers of blood to do it.  Despite all the hyperbole, our nation has been through this sort of conflict before and we will survive. 

If you behaved in a hostile way, I hope that you did not represent yourself as a Libertarian when you spoke with your representatives’ office staff.  While I appreciate your passionate dedication to liberty, I think you have a habit of too easily retreating to calls for violence.   This latest piece of bad legislation does not equal “being taken at gunpoint to the FEMA camps.”  .  If Republican Ron Paul was magically inserted into the White House amid a cloud of flying unicorns farting rainbows, he could not reverse this legislation nor could he rectify the wrongs that have been perpetrated on our nation before he dies of old age.  The solution is in wholehearted support for the only political party that represents citizen liberty and limited government. 

LIBERTARIAN PARTY 2012

[matt_schutter]

Matt, when Republican Ron Paul goes on to his heavenly reward, the Libertarian Party will still be active promoting citizen liberty and limited government.  And we won't need to wade through rivers of blood to do it.  Despite all the hyperbole, our nation has been through this sort of conflict before and we will survive. 

If you behaved in a hostile way, I hope that you did not represent yourself as a Libertarian when you spoke with your representatives’ office staff.  While I appreciate your passionate dedication to liberty, I think you have a habit of too easily retreating to calls for violence.   This latest piece of bad legislation does not equal “being taken at gunpoint to the FEMA camps.”  .  If Republican Ron Paul was magically inserted into the White House amid a cloud of flying unicorns farting rainbows, he could not reverse this legislation nor could he rectify the wrongs that have been perpetrated on our nation before he dies of old age.  The solution is in wholehearted support for the only political party that represents citizen liberty and limited government. 

LIBERTARIAN PARTY 2012

Okay Erik I am the one that is Violent its okay to use the military against Americans and give them no trial, no hearing, no rights.  When they pick them up were do you think the military will take them if not fema camps?  On a dinner date?  97 Senators voted for this bill , and yes the only independent voted no and 3 democrats and 3 republicans. 

  I DID NOT SAY RON PAUL COULD SAVE US FROM THIS BILL.  But its a start it wouldn't be bad to have him in the white house and get more pro liberty senators. I am not saying ron paul in the white house and everything resolved. I would love to see Libertarians, Greens, Independents, Constitution party, and yes Republican, Democrats in our congress but it will take years if not decades to get to half that point. Also, why I say Ron Paul or bust is none of our candidates have a shot to be president in 2012.  Hell has a better chance of freezing over!

[vern]

There are also Democrats who oppose tyranny and dictatorship... go figure.  It was Alan Grayson who worked with Ron Paul to get an audit of the Fed, in conjunction with Bernie Sanders in the Senate... go figure.

The Republican Party has been built on hatred of the Democratic Party.  Both institutions are equally, EQUALLY corrupt.  The principles of Liberty and Democracy are not opposing ideas.  Individual and civil rights, together, form our human rights, and we should all try to recognize them in each other.

Something to consider is that "prohibitionism" actually came from the "left", the original Christian Progressives who banned alcohol in conjunction with winning civil rights for women.  The drug war began under FDR, as J. Edgar Hoover was set upon the petty gangs in America, from Capone to Huey Long.  By the end of WW2, the economy had been effectively nationalized, and now world empire eminates from Washington DC.

And today, progressives are just as to blame as conservatives for prohibitionism.  This is why an appeal to Liberty and to Democracy would be a sound course of action for the LP.  After all, they are opposite of "tyranny and dictatorship", are they not?

[Eviker]

Matt Schutter writes: Okay Erik I am the one that is Violent its okay to use the military against Americans and give them no trial, no hearing, no rights.

Erik Viker responds:  I do not understand your sarcasm here.  I did not claim you were violent.  You do have a history of loud public displays of hostility in meetings, you tend to make references to the the need for revolution, and you have below mentioned "REVOLUTION BLOOD."  I did not suggest you said “its okay to use the military against Americans and give them no trial, no hearing, no rights.”  

MS:  When they pick them up were do you think the military will take them if not fema camps? On a dinner date?

EV:  Even if we stipulate that the military will actually pick up American citizens and take them someplace, there are virtually thousands of possible destinations other than imaginary FEMA camps.  A dinner date is actually one possibility, but it’s not likely because security can be very difficult to ensure at most restaurants.  

MS:  97 Senators voted for this bill , and yes the only independent voted no and 3 democrats and 3 republicans.

EV:  This bit of information doesn’t refute any of my observations.  

MS:  I DID NOT SAY RON PAUL COULD SAVE US FROM THIS BILL.

EV:  I DIDN’T SAY YOU DID.

MS:  But its a start

EV:  No, it’s a step backward.  Electing another Republican politician does not promote a start toward the time when the Democrat-Republican stranglehold on government will end.  

MS:  it wouldn't be bad to have him in the white house and get more pro liberty senators.

EV:  It would not be bad compared to lots of even badder occupants of the White House.  The best of a bad lot is still bad.  He has as much of a chance of getting 270 Electoral College votes as I do.  You’re more likely to get “more pro-liberty senators” by campaigning for Libertarian Party candidates instead of for a Republican Party presidential candidate.  

MS:  I am not saying ron paul in the white house and everything resolved.

EV:  Good, because that would be silly.

MS:  I would love to see Libertarians, Greens, Independents, Constitution party, and yes Republican, Democrats in our congress

EV:  I would prefer not to dilute the efforts of the Libertarian Party by supporting all those other groups that have so many wackadoodle ideas that do not promote citizen liberty and limited government.

MS:  but it will take years if not decades to get to half that point.

EV:  And it’ll take even longer thanks to people like you venerating another Republican Party politician instead of concentrating on Libertarian Party activism.  

MS:  Also, why I say Ron Paul or bust is none of our candidates have a shot to be president in 2012. Hell has a better chance of freezing over!

EV:  Even in today’s political climate, Paul will lose the Presidential election regardless of what party he ran with, and our party will not win the 2012 Presidential election regardless of who we run as a candidate. The Libertarian Party should therefore select as our 2012 standard-bearer a Libertarian Party member who can best represent Libertarian Party principles as we continue growing as an alternative to Republocratic Party failures.  Any Libertarian who supports a Republican Party candidate only dilutes our efforts to build an alternative to those anti-liberty failures.  

[djahn]

Matt, when Republican Ron Paul goes on to his heavenly reward, the Libertarian Party will still be active promoting citizen liberty and limited government.

The operative word being "promoting".  The LP has been promoting citizen liberty and limited government for four decades without actually delivering. 

LIBERTARIAN PARTY 2012

2012 will likely play out like all of the other election cycles for the LP.  None of the LP candidates will have much of an influence much less get elected.  It will be a year of political masturbation which is fine as long as you are satisfied in the end with not actually achieving anything.  In the end, few outside the LP will remember the name of our Presidential candidate.  Fewer will remember names of the LP candidates running for lower offices.

If your goal is to make changes at the federal level, the LP may not be the best vehicle at this time.