Language in Senate bill would REQUIRE Indefinite Military Detention for terror suspects.

[Anti Federalist]

Yes, kiddies, that applies to me and you as well.

If government calls you a terrorist, you become an unperson.



Is the US Getting Domestic Indefinite Military Detention for Thanksgiving?

—By Adam Serwer
Tue Nov. 15, 2011 3:30 PM PST

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/11/america-getting-domestic-indefinite-military-detention-thanksgiving

A bipartisan group of senators is poised to force through dramatic changes to how the US government handles suspected terrorists—over the objections of the White House and Senate Democratic leadership.

Legislative language that emerged from the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday afternoon would mandate the automatic, indefinite military detention of noncitizens apprehended in the United States who are suspected members of Al Qaeda or associated groups.

The wording, which is part of a must-pass bill to fund the military, also appears to allow the indefinite military detention of citizens and legal permanent residents.

The bill would also extend restrictions on transfers of detainees from Guantánamo Bay, though only for one year.

Obama administration officials fear that the mandatory detention provisions could force the FBI to interrupt ongoing investigations in order to hand suspected terrorists over to the military. They also worry that the new rules could interfere with the prosecution of suspected terrorists in federal courts. At a homeland security and counterterrorism conference in September, White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan warned that "this approach would impose unprecedented restrictions on the ability of experienced professionals to combat terrorism." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) held up the defense funding bill in mid-October on the basis of the those objections. The latest changes to the bill appear to address some of the administration's concerns by claiming that designating an individual a terrorist "does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering activities." But civil liberties advocates are disappointed.

"The problems with these provisions have not been fixed—they've been made worse," says Chris Anders, legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union. "There is absolutely no reason for Congress to now pass legislation that would put in indefinite military detention American citizens and other suspects apprehended far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself. "

Anders also points out that it's entirely possible that the detention provisions could become more restrictive once other Senate Republicans start demanding changes to them. Reid, however, doesn't sound like he's willing to hold the bill up any further. "It hasn't been worked out to the satisfaction of everyone," Reid said of the defense bill, "but there comes a time when we have to stop negotiating and move to the legislation."

A Senate Democratic aide said that Reid was hoping to move the bill to the floor as early as next week.

"He's made no commitments on final passage until we see what comes out of the Senate, and then what comes out of the conference," the aide said. "He just wants to move the bill to the floor before Thanksgiving."

[flightlesskiwi]

picked up my daughter from school today.

they have a "terms of the week" poster.

on that poster for this week was "democracy vs. constitutional republic" with the definitions given for both. it indicated that our country is a constitutional republic. (she goes to a private school, btw).

it made me smile.

this story makes me scowl.

[donnay]

^^^ Glad to see that private schools are educating!

Rule of thumb is-- if a bill has the words, "Patriot and defense" in it, you must apply Orwellian definitions!

[Noob]

Don't forget about the other similarly bill to this, the Enemy Expatriation Act.

[Lucille]

Is this the same indefinite detention bill (or rather, language) that BSC! McCain and his best bud Souless Joe Lieberman were pushing for back in '10? If so, it is the main reason why David Nolan (may he RIP) ran for Senate against McCain.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/a-detention-bill-you-ought-to-read-more-carefully/37116/

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

These people are out of their fucking minds. Where are the fucking terrorists?

[flightlesskiwi]

These people are out of their fucking minds. Where are the fucking terrorists?

reported. see something say something.


(/s)

[donnay]

These people are out of their fucking minds. Where are the fucking terrorists?

In DC (District of Criminals)!

[Anti Federalist]

////

[Danke]

////

This could mean we won't have AF bumping his threads with //// anymore.

[QueenB4Liberty]

I thought we had this already. lol Nothing surprises me anymore.

[flightlesskiwi]

This could mean we won't have AF bumping his threads with //// anymore.

if AF goes, many of us will be gone, too.

[Anti Federalist]

This could mean we won't have AF bumping his threads with //// anymore.

http://justifiedright.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341e75ed53ef01156f877446970c-800wi

[Danke]

if AF goes, many of us will be gone, too.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_sK6O7q1TURQ/TObqUqbdl7I/AAAAAAAAEIk/iKnzCJP8vvU/s1600/janet+napolitano+10.jpg

[Anti Federalist]

That's some pair of meat hooks on that broad. ^^^^

FFS, I've seen longshoremen with daintier hands.

And Danke has the nerve to bitch at me about the Wal Marx pics?

[donnay]

I thought we had this already. lol Nothing surprises me anymore.

We do, it is laid out in the Military Commission Act (2006) and indefinite detention for enemy combatants.

[DamianTV]

if AF goes, many of us will be gone, too.

Well, one lucky one might be fortunate enough to have AF as their Cellmate in a FEMA Camp...

[Anti Federalist]

Well, one lucky one might be fortunate enough to have AF as their Cellmate in a FEMA Camp...

Ain't gonna be no FEMA camp for AF, unless the bastards get the drop on me.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Who write this shit into bills? You know these political prostitutes just pass the paperwork along.

[Danke]

Ain't gonna be no FEMA camp for AF, unless the bastards get the drop on me.

http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/2009/01/15/jnapolitano_s640x427.JPG?73b8e21685896c3f2859310aa a5adb253919b641

[flightlesskiwi]

http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/2009/01/15/jnapolitano_s640x427.JPG?73b8e21685896c3f2859310aa a5adb253919b641

Danke, now i understand what you mean by your "location"

(thanks for all those lovely pics that you dredged up. i'm going to go to peopleofwalmart and detox now)

[Danke]

Danke, now i understand what you mean by your "location"

(thanks for all those lovely pics that you dredged up. i'm going to go to peopleofwalmart and detox now)

Can't beat them, join them... ;)

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Ain't gonna be no FEMA camp for AF, unless the bastards get the drop on me.


I am starting to hear things like this from rather regular people I meet on the street.

[Noob]

rge the Senate to Oppose Indefinite Military Detention
Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter
The U.S. Senate is considering the unthinkable: changing detention laws to imprison people — including Americans living in the United States itself — indefinitely and without charge.

The Defense Authorization bill — a "must-pass" piece of legislation — is headed to the Senate floor with troubling provisions that would give the President — and all future presidents — the authority to indefinitely imprison people, without charge or trial, both abroad and inside the United States.

Urge your Senators to oppose sections 1031 and 1032 of the Defense Authorization bill.

https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3865&s_subsrc=fixNDAA

[ZanZibar]

Rand and McCain clash over "indefinite detainment"

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/195889-sens-paul-mccain-clash-over-terrorist-detainee-amendment-

[Matt Collins]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rghhz_t5POo&feature=uploademail

[Matt Collins]

Rand corners McCain on "indefinite detention" of US citizens!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUHh1iqe43w

[Anti Federalist]

Rand corners McCain on "indefinite detention" of US citizens!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUHh1iqe43w

So then that is a yes, McPain?

So now our rights are dependent on what the mob says, eh?

OK, one +rep for Rand.

[JK/SEA]

///

[pcosmar]

Won't be much need for FEMA camps when all they have to do is impose a curfew on EVERYONE.

Wasn't that Ron's point about the fence?

[Matt Collins]

Sen. Rand Paul Defends Constitutional Liberties

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today in the U.S. Senate, Sen. Rand Paul took to the Senate floor as well as recorded a video message against the indefinite detention of United States citizens in defense of constitutional liberties.

CLICK HERE TO SEE SEN. PAUL’S ADDRESS REGARDING DETAINEES (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rghhz_t5POo)


TRANSCRIPT:


James Madison, father of the Constitution, warned, “The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become instruments of tyranny at home.”

Abraham Lincoln had similar thoughts, saying “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter, and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”

During war there has always been a struggle to preserve Constitutional liberties. During the Civil War the right of habeas corpus was suspended. Newspapers were closed down. Fortunately, these rights were restored after the war.

The discussion now to suspend certain rights to due process is especially worrisome given that we are engaged in a war that appears to have no end. Rights given up now cannot be expected to be returned. So, we do well to contemplate the diminishment of due process, knowing that the rights we lose now may never be restored.

My well-intentioned colleagues ignore these admonitions in defending provisions of the Defense bill pertaining to detaining suspected terrorists.

Their legislation would arm the military with the authority to detain indefinitely – without due process or trial – SUSPECTED al-Qaida sympathizers, including American citizens apprehended on American soil.

I want to repeat that. We are talking about people who are merely SUSPECTED of a crime. And we are talking about American citizens.

If these provisions pass, we could see American citizens being sent to Guantanamo Bay.

This should be alarming to everyone watching this proceeding today. Because it puts every single American citizen at risk.

There is one thing and one thing only protecting innocent Americans from being detained at will at the hands of a too-powerful state – our constitution, and the checks we put on government power. Should we err today and remove some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism, well, then the terrorists have won.

Detaining citizens without a court trial is not American. In fact, this alarming arbitrary power is reminiscent of Egypt’s “permanent” Emergency Law authorizing preventive indefinite detention, a law that provoked ordinary Egyptians to tear their country apart last spring and risk their lives to fight.

Recently, Justice Scalia affirmed this idea in his dissent in the Hamdi case, saying:

“Where the Government accuses a citizen of waging war against it, our constitutional tradition has been to prosecute him in federal court for treason or some other crime.”

He concluded: “The very core of liberty secured by our Anglo-Saxon system of separated powers has been freedom from indefinite imprisonment at the will of the Executive

Justice Scalia was, as he often does, following the wisdom of our founding fathers.

As Franklin wisely warned against, we should not attempt to trade liberty for security, if we do we may end up with neither. And really, what security does this indefinite detention of Americans give us?

The first and flawed premise, both here and in the badly misname patriot act, is that our pre-911 police powers were insufficient to combat international terrorism.

This is simply not borne out by the facts.

Congress long ago made it a crime to provide, or to conspire to provide, material assistance to al-Qaida or other listed foreign terrorist organizations. Material assistance includes virtually anything of value – including legal or political advice, education, books, newspapers, lodging or otherwise. The Supreme Court sustained the constitutionality of the sweeping prohibition.

And this is not simply about catching terrorists after the fact, as others may insinuate. The material assistance law is in fact forward-looking and preventive, not backward-looking and reactive.

Al-Qaida adherents may be detained, prosecuted and convicted for conspiring to violate the material assistance prohibition before any injury to an American. Jose Padilla, for instance, was convicted and sentenced to 17 years in prison for conspiring to provide material assistance to al-Qaida. The criminal law does not require dead bodies on the sidewalk before it strikes at international terrorism.

Indeed, conspiracy law and prosecutions in civilian courts have been routinely invoked after 9/11, to thwart embryonic international terrorism.

Michael Chertoff, then head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and later Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, testified shortly after 9/11 to the Senate Judiciary Committee. He underscored that, “the history of this government in prosecuting terrorists in domestic courts has been one of unmitigated success and one in which the judges have done a superb job of managing the courtroom and not compromising our concerns about security and our concerns about classified information.”

Moreover, there is no evidence that criminal justice procedures have frustrated intelligence collection about international terrorism. Suspected terrorists have repeatedly waived both the right to an attorney and the right to silence. Additionally, Miranda warnings are not required at all when the purpose of interrogation is public safety.

The authors of this bill errantly maintain that the bill would not enlarge the universe of detainees eligible for indefinite detention in military custody. This is simply not the case.

The current Authorization for Use of Military Force confines the universe to persons implicated in the 9/11 attacks or who harbored those who were.

The detainee provision would expand the universe to include any person said to be “part of” or “substantially” supportive of al-Qaida or Taliban.

These terms are dangerously vague. More than a decade after 9/11, the military has been unable to define the earmarks of membership in or affiliation to either organization.

Some say that to prevent another 9/11 attack we must fight terrorism with a war mentality and not treat potential attackers as criminals. For combatants captured on the battlefield, I tend to agree.

But 9/11 didn't succeed because we granted the terrorists due process. 9/11 attacks did not succeed because al-Qaida was so formidable, but because of human error. The Defense Department withheld intelligence from the FBI. No warrants were denied. The warrants weren't requested. The FBI failed to act on repeated pleas from its field agents, agents who were in possession of laptop with information that might have prevented 9/11.

These are not failures of laws. They are not failures of procedures. They are failures of imperfect men and women in bloated bureaucracies. No amount of liberty sacrificed on the altar of the state will ever change that.

A full accounting of our human failures by 9/11 Commission would have proven that enhanced cooperation between law enforcement and the intelligence community, not military action or vandalizing liberty at home, is the key to thwarting international terrorism.

We should not have to sacrifice our Liberty to be safe. We cannot allow the rules to change to fit the whims of those in power. The rules, the binding chains of our constitution were written so that it didn’t MATTER who was in power. In fact, they were written to protect us and our rights, from those who hold power without good intentions. We are not governed by saints or angels. Our constitution allows for that. This bill does not.

Finally, the detainee provisions of the defense authorization bill do another grave harm to freedom: they imply perpetual war for the first time in the history of the United States.

No benchmarks are established that would ever terminate the conflict with al-Qaida, Taliban, or other foreign terrorist organizations. In fact, this bill explicitly states that no part of this bill is to imply any restriction on the authorization to use force. No congressional review is allowed or imagined. No victory is defined. No peace is possible if victory is made impossible by definition.

To disavow the idea that the exclusive congressional power to declare war somehow allows the President to continue war forever at whim, I will also be offering an amendment this week to de-authorize the Iraq War.

Use of military force must begin in congress with its authorization. And it should end in congress with its termination. Congress should not be ignored or an afterthought in these matters, and must reclaim its constitutional duties.

The detainee provisions ask us to give up consist rights as an emergency or exigency but make no room for expiration. Perhaps the Emergency Law in Egypt began with good intentions in 1958 but somehow it came to be hated, to be despised with such vigor that protesters chose to burn themselves alive rather allow continuation of indefinite detention.

Today, someone must stand up for the rights of the American people to be free. We must stand up to tyranny disguised as security. I urge my colleagues to reject the language on detainees in this bill, and to support amendments to strip these provisions from the defense bill.

[ZanZibar]

Mike Lee and Jim DeMint voted against the amendment that would've killed the illegal indefinite detention aspect of the bill: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00210

[JK/SEA]

Mike Lee. He's on Freedom Watch as one of the Judges Freedom Fighters.....Thanks Mike....and Demint....True NeoCons. Any questions now about these 2 scumbags?

[Created4]

Mike Lee. He's on Freedom Watch as one of the Judges Freedom Fighters.....Thanks Mike....and Demint....True NeoCons. Any questions now about these 2 scumbags?

Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin was also on the Judge's show last night, and he too voted against this amendment. I hope he invites these guys back and grills them on this issue.

[libertygrl]

Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin was also on the Judge's show last night, and he too voted against this amendment. I hope he invites these guys back and grills them on this issue.

I believe I saw a tweet from Justin Amash earlier that said he and Rand will be on the Judge's show tonight.

[Keith and stuff]

Mike Lee. He's on Freedom Watch as one of the Judges Freedom Fighters.....Thanks Mike....and Demint....True NeoCons. Any questions now about these 2 scumbags?

They aren't neocons based on the definition Ron Paul uses for neocon. They are conservatives. If they were wrong on most economic issues and also wrong on war/terror issues than they would be neocons.

[Created4]

I believe I saw a tweet from Justin Amash earlier that said he and Rand will be on the Judge's show tonight.

I would think the Judge is going to have an interesting show tonight with all the news today!

[PursuePeace]

I believe I saw a tweet from Justin Amash earlier that said he and Rand will be on the Judge's show tonight.

yeah, I was just coming here to post this.

From Judge's facebook:
Bringing the Federal War of Terror Home? - Sen. Rand Paul & Rep. Justin Amash Vs. the Usurpers of the Constitution 8PM ET FOXBusiness

[Brett85]

They aren't neocons based on the definition Ron Paul uses for neocon. They are conservatives. If they were wrong on most economic issues and also wrong on war/terror issues than they would be neocons.

Unfortunately, people here use the term "neocon" to describe anybody who isn't a down the line libertarian.

[LibertyEagle]

Mike Lee. He's on Freedom Watch as one of the Judges Freedom Fighters.....Thanks Mike....and Demint....True NeoCons. Any questions now about these 2 scumbags?

No, they are not "neocons". Misusing this term makes it almost meaningless when it truly applies.

[acptulsa]

These people are out of their fucking minds. Where are the fucking terrorists?

Have more than seven days' food supply--perhaps as a hedge against inflation?

Look in the mirror, terrist.

[pcosmar]

No, they are not "neocons". Misusing this term makes it almost meaningless when it truly applies.
It is overused. But then so is "Conservative".
Anyone that gives a bit of lip service to an issue is touted as some kind of Freedom Fighter. When all they are is yet another political opportunist.

:(

[acptulsa]

Mike Lee. He's on Freedom Watch as one of the Judges Freedom Fighters.....Thanks Mike....and Demint....True NeoCons. Any questions now about these 2 scumbags?

Yeah. How did Mike Lee fool anyone into thinking he was anything but a scumbag?

You know, now that we're moving Ron Paul into serious contention for the presidency, there are all kinds of really spooky crap moving through those two houses. We had better not slow the pace of education, folks.

[pcosmar]

Have more than seven days' food supply--perhaps as a hedge against inflation?

Look in the mirror, terrist.

I have a Box Cutter on my belt.
I have taken the term as a badge of honor.

[acptulsa]

I have a Box Cutter on my belt.
I have taken the term as a badge of honor.

You don't scare me, man. But then, I'm not trying to rob and enslave you, either.

[Brett85]

Yeah. How did Mike Lee fool anyone into thinking he was anything but a scumbag?

You know, now that we're moving Ron Paul into serious contention for the presidency, there are all kinds of really spooky crap moving through those two houses. We had better not slow the pace of education, folks.

So Mike Lee is a "scumbag" because he's taken a position on an issue that you disagree with? Can we ever get past the point that we personally attack politicians who we disagree with politically?

[Chieppa1]

So Mike Lee is a "scumbag" because he's taken a position on an issue that you disagree with? Can we ever get past the point that we personally attack politicians who we disagree with politically?

When their positions end up as unconstitutional legislation that infringe on our natural rights, prob never.

[Brett85]

When their positions end up as unconstitutional legislation that infringe on our natural rights, prob never.

95% of the laws that are passed by Congress do that, so I guess that means that we have to hate and personally attack every politician except for the Paul's.

[ZanZibar]

95% of the laws that are passed by Congress do that, so I guess that means that we have to hate and personally attack every politician except for the Paul's.You must be new here...

[Lucille]

David Nolan (http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2010/09/30/nolan-exposes-mccain%E2%80%99s-antipathy-for-civil-liberties-in-arizona-senate-debate/): “One of the reasons I got into this race is that right now, at this very moment Sen. McCain is a sponsor – I think the lead sponsor of Senate Bill 3081 […] a bill which would authorize the arrest and indefinite detention of American citizens without trial and without recourse. This is one of the most dangerous, evil, un-American bills that’s ever been proposed in congress and nobody who would sponsor such a bill should be sitting in a seat in the United States Senate.”

That's what it is, all right. The sponsors and YAY! voters should all be run out of town on a rail.

[wgadget]

I just heard on the radio that the Senate passed a bill so that soldiers can get through airports quicker. Anyone else hear that?

[Brett85]

This article actually says that Mike Lee is with Rand on this issue. So who knows? I guess we'll see how he votes on Rand's amendment.

http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/defense-bill-includes-authorization-for-indefinite/

[PineGroveDave]

This is it...If this fucking bill passes and is signed by Obama I have gone on record on FB to do, and record, something that I (as a veteran) am vehemently opposed to....I have gone on record stating that if this passes I am going to burn the flag along with a copy of the Constitution. I honestly never thought I would hear myself say that. As a vet, the flag means a lot to me.

[Created4]

I just heard on the radio that the Senate passed a bill so that soldiers can get through airports quicker. Anyone else hear that?

It was the House. Passed unanimously. http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9092808-house-approves-new-tsa-rules-for-us-military

[flightlesskiwi]

This is it...If this fucking bill passes and is signed by Obama I have gone on record on FB to do, and record, something that I (as a veteran) am vehemently opposed to....I have gone on record stating that if this passes I am going to burn the flag along with a copy of the Constitution. I honestly never thought I would hear myself say that. As a vet, the flag means a lot to me.:(

here is to holding out hope that you won't have to do that!!

[flightlesskiwi]

It was the House. Passed unanimously. http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9092808-house-approves-new-tsa-rules-for-us-military

ROFL:
However, Erica Pena-Vest, founder and travel editor for GuidetoMilitaryTravel.com, told msnbc.com that while she thinks members of Congress have their heart in the right place, she's never heard any active-duty member of the military complain about having to go through airport security, just like any other American. “Most military people don’t like to be singled out,” she said, adding that only the U.S. Army travels in uniform.

“I think as a society we can think of other ways to honor our military," said Pena-Vest, who is married to an aviator in the U.S. Navy. "I don’t necessarily think that helping them expedite the security screening process is necessarily the answer."

necessary evil is necessarily for all.

[ShaneEnochs]

I just heard on the radio that the Senate passed a bill so that soldiers can get through airports quicker. Anyone else hear that?


“While this program would not guarantee expedited screening — we must retain a certain element of randomness to prevent terrorists from gaming the system — the testing of this concept holds the potential to significantly change the travel experience for members of the U.S. Armed Forces in the future,” Soule said. ..

[SL89]

This is it...If this fucking bill passes and is signed by Obama I have gone on record on FB to do, and record, something that I (as a veteran) am vehemently opposed to....I have gone on record stating that if this passes I am going to burn the flag along with a copy of the Constitution. I honestly never thought I would hear myself say that. As a vet, the flag means a lot to me.

I too am a veteran and I swore to protect the constitution! I intend to do that with force if needed, I don't care if I am alone in this. Don't give up on the greatest gift and responsibility that was entrusted to us by the founders. I won't. You can burn the flag and protest but, please don't burn the constitution, we need it to rebuild after this mess. And we will rebuild when Dr. Paul is president.

[SL89]

I actually just teared up at the brevity of our situation. :(

[Anti Federalist]

Originally Posted by wgadget
I just heard on the radio that the Senate passed a bill so that soldiers can get through airports quicker. Anyone else hear that?

It was the House. Passed unanimously. http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9092808-house-approves-new-tsa-rules-for-us-military

Yeah, and the Centurions can board the aircraft before anybody else as well.

Of course if your average flag feeding, mouth breathing, yahoo which is likely to believe the official story, would think about things clearly for one second, he would have a moment of cognitive dissonance bad enough to make his head explode, when he realized that the worst act of "domestic terrorism" ever carried out in the US, was done by a decorated, honorably discharged combat vet.

[Anti Federalist]

..

You have a question, Mundane?

[pcosmar]

I actually just teared up at the brevity of our situation. :(

Past tears.

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4037/4649551287_b477011ac1_z.jpg

I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.

I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and to aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.

When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.


There are still many of us out here.

If this makes me a "Domestic Terrorist", so be it.

[Anti Federalist]

There are still many of us out here.

If this makes me a "Domestic Terrorist", so be it.

I hope to God you are right.

Because I've honestly got to say, every single fiber of my being is screaming haul ass, right now.

This is Germany 1938.

[pcosmar]

I hope to God you are right.

Because I've honestly got to say, every single fiber of my being is screaming haul ass, right now.

This is Germany 1938.

Germany had an underground.

Granted, they were few. I think there are more here.
It still sucks that it will come to that.

[SL89]

Thanks Peter. + rep. I have stated where I stand in a few threads tonight. I teared at the thought that people are acting too late and are not going to do enough to get RP into office. But, I am ready.
When they come for me, I will be in the news...... "Five dead cops and one dead K-9, can't find the perp" "rumor is he was a survivalist and had a years worth of food...we can't find anything but a few cans of beans, oh yeah, I am here live and can't find the guns he reportedly had." "He has a family too, how did they get out?? Sorry Mr. Blitzer, American freaks are not supposed to get away with protecting their rights" "I am dumbfounded!" "Roll the "wanted dead or alive pics" " "I think, Wolf...he was a want to be crazy that frequented RP forums...a place pushing CRAZY ideas." "Call Crimestoppers now if you see him. and DO NOT FEED THE ANIMAL he is dangerous for wanting peace" Back to you Wolf." :(:(:(

[anaconda]

Go Rand Paul.

[Matt Collins]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKaTxjxnYfE&feature=uploademail

[Brick-in-the-Wall]

I hope to God you are right.

Because I've honestly got to say, every single fiber of my being is screaming haul ass, right now.

This is Germany 1938.

I won't lie, I see stuff like this and I think the same.

Either...
A. We clean house and election Ron Paul, and others like him, to turn the tide
B. We arm ourselves and revolt
C. We watch as this place slowly turns into Orwell's 1984

The more I see out of American citizens makes me feel partisan politics keeps A out, no will for B, and C is the only option.

I'd love, love, to be wrong.

[ZanZibar]

McCain and Lindsey Graham....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7tavj7Jhko
Courtesy of Mike Church radio show