January 20, 2013

Drones Officially Take Flight For Domestic Law Enforcement, Heralding a New Level of the Police State

It is a sign of just how fast the police state is advancing that drones in American skies have gone from conspiracy theory to admitted fact in about a year.

In a precedent-setting event, local law enforcement in North Dakota nabbed three suspected armed men with the help of a Predator B unmanned drone. It was only after the drone confirmed that the men were unarmed that police moved in to make the arrest.

It has now become clear that, as we have written and warned about for the past year, the drones that were supposedly commissioned strictly as tools for border control will now patrol inland for suspected criminals on American soil, heralding a new level of police state oppression.

In April I wrote about the future expansion of unmanned drones over America based on the admissions made by two-star General, John Priddy, from the U.S. National Air Security Operations Center, evidenced in the video below, that the continued expansion of predator drone surveillancewas a stated goal for the coming years.

His comments were echoed by Al Palmer, Director of Unmanned Aircraft Training at the world’s largest center at the University of North Dakota, which just so happens to be the location of the arrest alluded to above, that “The world is going to spend $80 billion on unmanned aircraft between now and 2016.”

As the Los Angeles Times report states:

Congress first authorized Customs and Border Protection to buy unarmed Predators in 2005. Officials in charge of the fleet cite broad authority to work with police from budget requests to Congress that cite ‘interior law enforcement support’ as part of their mission.

True to form, once the cat is out of the bag, we learn just how extensive the program really is.

Michael C. Kostelnik, a retired Air Force general who heads the office that supervises the drones, said Predators are flown ‘in many areas around the country, not only for federal operators, but also for state and local law enforcement and emergency responders in times of crisis.’

Beyond the troubling announcement that military drones have arrived from overseas to conduct operations in America, the way in which this first arrest was made — and the family that was targeted — should be equally disturbing.

The Brossart family are owners of a 3,000-acre ranch who were reported to police for stray cows that had entered a neighboring property. When the Sheriff arrived with a search warrant he said he was forced off the property at gunpoint. Apparently, the Sheriff feared that this could turn into another Ruby Ridge incident:

The six adult Brossarts allegedly belonged to the Sovereign Citizen Movement, an antigovernment group that the FBI considers extremist and violent. The family had repeated run-ins with local police, including the arrest of two family members earlier that day arising from their clash with a deputy over the cattle.

This incident too comfortably fits the new narrative which seeks to justify an expansion of the War on Terror by including America as the new war zone, thus enabling all military hardware to be used, and eradicating the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. These Sovereign Citizens, as “extremist and violent” by decree, have received the very same treatment as those in the Middle East and North Africa who are suspected insurgents or enemy combatants.

This event also comes shortly after the recent exposure of a secret drone base in Nevada, housed on the same land reserve as Area 51 of all places. This discovery merely shows that the drone program is full-speed ahead inside the United States, as similar “secret” programs have been uncovered overseas in places like Ethiopia and The Seychelles.

The unmanned drone program in the U.S. actually goes back to at least 2007 when it was first uncovered by reporters in Texas that drones were being tested inside America in an exercise coordinated with local police. The claim that this was only for border control was quickly shattered when Miami-Dade county, FL became the first to commission micro-drones, which are specifically designed for effective use in the close quarters of a city environment.

Now that the precedent has been set — with a supporting narrative to boot — the full spectrum of the drone capability is set to be unleashed in America. Everything from spotting “adversarial intent” to facial recognition, soft biometrics, general threat assessments and even nano drones that mimic nature itself. And don’t think that weaponization is far off.

We will be sold first on the effective use of surveillance to thwart armed conflict, like this one with the dangerous Sovereign Citizens, and other extremists to come no doubt. Then, perhaps we will see them used to deliver non-lethal weapons from above to quell protests (sorry, riots). Then, once we have become fully acclimated . . . .

Dennis Kucinich is one of very few critical voices on this issue. Kucinich penned a terrific commentary back in August warning of the threat to the rule of law posed by unmanned drones. His screed was directed toward their misuse overseas, but he alludes to the writing on the wall, which clearly states that America shall be viewed as no different than any other country plagued by remote control surveillance and warfare:

Think of the use of drone air strikes as summary executions, extra-judicial killings justified by faceless bureaucrats using who-knows-what ‘intelligence,’ with no oversight whatsoever and you get the idea that we have slipped into spooky new world where joystick gods manipulating robots deal death from the skies and then go home and hug their children. Everything America was once said to stand for: the rule of law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is in danger of becoming collateral damage as our fearful leaders continue to kill suspects and innocent alike, mindlessly unaware that the hellfire we are sowing will surely be reaped by Americans in the future. The proliferation of drone technology and its inevitable extension to civilian law enforcement is a leap into the arms of Big Brother.

We have seen horrendous civilian casualties in other countries from this supposed high-tech fleet of unmanned drones operated from trailers thousands of miles away. Countries like Pakistan have had enough and have sent the fleet packing. I submit that we should not wait for the casualties to mount before dismissing this wasteful military expenditure that is part and parcel of deleting human life, and deleting our Constitution.

 

Source: http://www.activistpost.com/2011/12/drones-officially-take-flight-for.html#more

The New Third World Police State: Welcome To America!

America. Synonymous with freedom to the people of oppressive nations all over the globe-or was, once. These days, we’re seeing examples of the erosion of Constitutionally-guaranteed rights and freedoms with frightening irregularity, and citizens of those oppressive nations are standing and protesting in solidarity with oppressed citizens of the United States. Our rapidly dwindling freedoms, combined with the conditions that many Americans are just waking up to discover, indicate that America is developing all the hallmarks of nations we refer to as the Third World. America is also perilously close to completely meeting the generally accepted definition of a police or totalitarian state. Sound alarmist? Sure. But for good reason. Alarmist doesn’t always equate to “wrong”.

PoliceStateWeAreHereToHelp Consider the elements of a police state. In a police state, the government: exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political aspects of the lives of citizens; exhibits elements of totalitarianism; restricts mobility; and restricts freedom of expression, particularly with regard to views that are in opposition to the views held by the government. War or national emergency has historically been a precursor to the shift to becoming a police state, as fear generally causes people to accept restrictions and indignities they otherwise would not, in the name of safety.

Political control may be exerted by government-sponsored forces operating outside the laws citizens are subject to, and there is little to no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the government; in other words, the government cannot violate the law, because the government’s actions are the law, even when they’re not.BigBrother The communications of residents are subject to monitoring by elements of the government, and nations accused of being a police state will generally deny it.

Totalitarianism involves the attempt to regulate every aspect of residents’ lives, and no recognized limit to the government’s authority. This type of system achieves and maintains control via a single political party, economic control, restricted speech, burdensome regulations, mass surveillance, etc. Widespread use of fear inspires terror in its residents, making them more malleable to control; this is achieved through an ongoing propaganda campaign, which is delivered to the people via government-controlled mass media.

Sound familiar? They should.

CuffedByTheFlag It’s always seemed odd to me that the nation lauded for being “free” has so many laws that it’s virtually impossible for the average citizen to keep track of them all-and more are passed every year. Our system of law is so rigid that ignorance of even one of the thousands of laws is not an excuse for those who break it unknowingly. These laws cover everything, from marriage to regulating individual seat belt use, use of substances, legal methods of procuring food, IRS, investments, campaign financing, etc. Laws are written in such a vague manner that they encourage expansive interpretation by law enforcement and prosecutors, leaving average citizens in danger of severe consequences for behavior that few would believe illegal.

FirstAmendment Freedom of expression was so important in the eyes of our Founding Fathers that they guaranteed us the right to it in our First Amendment. Bear in mind that our Founding Fathers were men who felt so abused by their previous government that they started a war over the right to found their own, and designed the Constitution to protect American citizens from the new government. Since 1925, courts have consistently ruled that our 14thAmendment applies our First Amendment to states and localities as well. Lifelong American citizens often take free speech for granted, as most of us have never experienced anything to the contrary. But during the overreaching police actions against the Occupy protests, the Constitutionally-guaranteed rights of thousands of Americans were violated-publicly, intentionally, and violently. Peaceable, non- PoliceBrutalityKickAssviolent protesters have, during the practice of peaceable assembly, freedom of speech and airing of grievances, been violently evicted from public property; had their belongings wrongfully seized by police, tossed into garbage trucks and destroyed; have been pepper-sprayed, tear-gassed, beaten with police batons, shot with wooden dowels, bean bag rounds, rubber bullets and other “non-lethal” rounds, sometimes from lethal distances, and have been attacked with stun grenades and sound cannons. These rights violations against dissenting citizens have been so severe that they attracted the notice of the United Nations special rapporteur for the protection of free expression, who is drafting an official communication to the U.S. government, questioning why the government is not taking action to protect these fundamental rights. The First Amendment is far from the only example of Constitutional erosion by the government. For example, our 4th Amendment rights [unreasonable search & seizure] face regular attack, as does our 2nd Amendment [right to bear arms].

SameShit

On the surface, America has two political parties. But if we look at what the combination of these parties have actually accomplished [not much], and who those accomplishments actually benefit [generally, Wall Street], they may as well be one. They certainly go out of their way to exclude any third parties that may not be as willing to play for the same team. Third party candidates do not enjoy the same level of financial support from their small party as do the major party candidates. Third-party candidates are also generally excluded from televised debates, and are not entitled to the level of public campaign financing received by candidates from the major political parties, often placing the cost of television advertising far out of reach. These disadvantages do all but guarantee that voters will remain largely ignorant of the party and its chosen candidates, and that a third party would find it exceedingly difficult to rise to the popularity of the Republicans or Democrats.

PuppetCrime The government controls the economy, and even our personal finances, with a heavily biased hand. “Free trade” laws ostensibly allow free trade, but in reality only make fair trade extremely difficult, and contributes to low American wages. The IRS ensures that you make your “contribution” to the government, whether or not your individual circumstances allow you to afford to do so; failure to pay up can earn you a stint in prison. And our government appears to be happy to bail out Wall Street using our money, but refuses to take any significant action to help the millions of families and individuals severely injured by Wall Street’s illegal actions. This helps to ensure that, for the most part, the wealthy stay wealthy,and the poor remain poor.

TSAGrope

When you think about it, even our mobility in America is certainly regulated to an amazing degree, whichever mode you choose. To drive, you need a license, a vehicle, insurance, and gas, all of which are, of course, taxed. The license requires two forms of ID, a written test, a practical test, a photo, and processing time. The vehicle can be pricey, and needs to be registered, inspected and insured. Since 1999, fuel prices can be artificially manipulated by anyone with enough cash and time, and the government can manipulate prices as well, in a variety of ways. Taking the bus [other than locally] or a boat requires ID, and, of course, cash. Train stations are now beginning to be invaded by the Transportation Security Administration, and TSA airport security has been an example of gross, government-perpetrated indignity upon the people for quite some time.

TSANun

The choice between allowing an acne-prone, dim-witted barely-high-school-graduate to view you naked on a radiation-emitting machine with transmission and storage capability or permitting a large and frightening ugly woman to sexually assault you in an attempt to discern whether or not you are carrying a bomb in your cervix/testicles is not much of a choice at all. And no one is immune: men; women; diaper-wearing infants; diaper-wearing, terminally ill elderly ladies; TSATouchBoobsbreast prosthetic-wearing breast cancer survivors; colostomy/urostomy patients; rape survivors; young children; attractive, large-breasted women; etc. This is done in the name of “safety”, despite the fact that no bombs have been detonated on U.S.-departing planes since 1960. The TSA doesn’t make us safer.

PuppetControlledGovernment

Political control held by those outside the government is demonstrated by the power and influence of Wall Street. Elected government representatives, compelled by fat re-election campaign donations, work to pass legislation favorable to their donors. Such legislation often contributes to the continuation of the gross wealth inequality that pervades America. Past legislation has also been responsible for causing substantial damage to the environment, and to the safety and availability of food, prescription drugs, and other consumable products. While it’s true that the People are responsible for electing their government representatives, it’s also true that corporate campaign contributions pay for campaign ads, in which facts are grossly misrepresented and manipulated; >CautionMediaLiesthese campaign advertisements often represent the sum total knowledge that the average American has about the candidates. As a result, representatives who represent only the interests of themselves and their campaign donors are elected. In effect, this makes virtually the entire American government subject to control by the wealthiest 0.1% of the population.

Contributing to this well-established, self-serving cycle is the covert campaign of propaganda. Most Americans truly believe that we have a free press. And we do, in Constitutional terms. But the Constitution only protects us from Congress. Virtually every major mainstream media outlet is owned and/or controlled by corporate interests or wealthy individuals.RonPaulItHappened This encompasses all major TV & radio stations/channels, magazines, newspapers, and even major websites. And the reports of this corporate-controlled mainstream media do not accurately reflect the facts. Reports are carefully crafted to include only those facts which support the positions of those who own or control the specific media outlet. Uncomfortable events are ignored, if possible; if it can’t be ignored, the persons involved are purposefully and persistently discredited.

War creates a common enemy, and feelings of patriotic unity. Endless war and international conflict creates a faceless, constant, omnipresent enemy, and is an excellent way to inspire fear. Enough fear softens the populace into accepting “safety” measures a free society otherwise wouldn’t. Since 1775, there have been only a few years in which the United States was not involving itself, militarily or covertly, in the business of other nations. OBL

 

For the last ten years, we’ve been fighting the “War On Terror”, leading to American fears of brown-skinned, bearded, turban-wrapped, burka-wearing Muslim or mistaken-for-Muslim individuals, unattended packages, and invisible, would-be airliner bombers concealing explosive materials in unmentionable places. While we fret over the loss of expensive, >3oz personal hygiene products at the hands of pimply, authoritarian TSA officials, the United States has been carrying out internationally-illegal operations in more than 120 nations, including raids, bombings and assassinations that kill innocent civilians as well as or instead of the intended targets. At least one American citizen living overseas was the intentional target of one such operation. So much for operating within the law.

Libya is another good example of the executive’s political power operating outside the law. The Constitution, the War Powers Act and U.S. law are very clear, and were violated; much of Congress expressed concern and dismay, but in then end, most of Congress allowed these crimes to stand, despite possessing the ability to remedy the action and to punish the executive who ordered it.

BattlefieldAmerica

On November 29th, 2011, a day which I most sincerely hope will NOT live in infamy, controversial portions of S1867, the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, were passed, allowing the U.S. military to indefinitely detain American citizens living on U.S. soil without due process or trial, and with nothing more than suspicion of terrorism as an excuse. Section 1031, in authorizing the military to engage in law enforcement actions on U.S. soil essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which protected citizens from military occupation by limiting the ability of governments to commonly use the federal military to perform law enforcement functions within the U.S. The stated rationale for this action is best summed up by South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who claims, “The homeland is part of the battlefield.”

1984

Other than the obvious issues one might have with a constant, active, armed-and-uniformed military presence on our own soil, this law would appear to be incompatible with many of our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights, including our Fourth , Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and 14th Amendment rights, which grant us the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure; right to due process; right to a speedy, public, impartial jury trial; right to be informed of charges against us; right to face opposing witnesses and to present supporting witnesses, right to an attorney; protection against cruel and unusual punishment; right to equal protection under the law. Mere suspicion as grounds for an arrest, not being informed of the charges against you, indefinite detention, torture, and a closed military tribunal, which may or may not even take place within the U.S. do not appear to meet these Constitutionally-guaranteed obligations of the U.S. to its citizens.

In essence, this means that the military can, at any time, come into your home, take you away, hide you in a military prison on a military base, fail to tell you what’s going on, torture you, fail to charge you, and keep you forever, if they so chose. And there’s not a damn thing you could do about it.

Anonymous Terrifying, especially when one stops to ponder exactly who and what our government’s definition of terrorism includes. The many different agencies tasked with national security have various definitions, but in general they include: low-level protesters, according to the Department of Defense; members of groups which support states’ authority over the federal government; members of groups dedicating to opposing a single issue, such as abortion, or immigration; those who are opposed to federal policies; those who focus on our specific economic issues; veterans, in general, and of the disillusioned, disgruntled and disabled varieties in particular. “Political deviants” are also on the radar; this is yet another way to discourage people from supporting any political party other than the two majors, as third-party supporters are considered “deviant“.

SmartphoneSpy

Combine this with the unsettling news that our “smart phones” apparently come fully equipped with stealth software that has the capability to keep track of the phone’s owner-and the phone’s owner’s business. Per Julian Assange, WikiLeaks founder, in addition to monitoring location-even when the phone is turned off-this type of software has the capability to record text messages, numbers dialed, keystrokes tapped and websites visited-including encrypted searches-and sends those records elsewhere, makes use of voice recognition software to identify the parties to a conversation, and can even snap surreptitious pics of people and places nearby.

They say that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Unfortunately, America and its residents appear to be existing in a nightmare of endless reruns. The results, and the implications, are terrifying.

 

Source: http://open.salon.com/blog/sickofstupid/2011/12/03/the_new_3rd_world_police_state_welcome_to_america

US: Congress to Vote on EXPLICITLY Creating a Police State

If You Thought Police Brutality Was Bad … Wait Until You See What Congress Wants to Do Next Week

The police brutality against peaceful protesters in Berkeley, Davis, Oakland and elsewhere is bad enough.

But next week, Congress will vote on explicitly creating a police state.

The ACLU’s Washington legislative office explains:

The Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield - even people in the United States itself.

***

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. The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday.

***

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?

***

In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

***

The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown.

Part of an Ongoing Trend

While this is shocking, it is not occurring in a vacuum. Indeed, it is part of a 30 year-long process of militarization inside our borders and a destruction of the American concepts of limited government and separation of powers.

As I pointed out in May:

The ACLU noted yesterday [that] Congress is proposing handing permanent, world-wide war-making powers to the president - including the ability to make war within the United States:

***

As I noted in 2008:

An article in the Army Times reveals that the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team will be redeployed from Iraq to domestic operations within the United States.

The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. TheArmy Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with “civil unrest” and “crowd control“.

The soldiers are learning to use so-called “nonlethal weapons” designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.

This violates posse comitatus and the Constitution. But, hey, we’re in a “national emergency”, so who cares, right?

(We’re still in a declared state of national emergency).

I noted a couple of months later:

Everyone knows that deploying 20,000 troops on U.S. soil violates Posse Comitatus and the Constitution.

And everyone understands that staging troops within the U.S. to “help out with civil unrest and crowd control” increases the danger of overt martial law.

But no one is asking an obvious question: Does the government’s own excuse for deploying the troops make any sense?

Other Encroachments On Civil Rights Under Obama

As bad as Bush was, the truth is that, in many ways, freedom and constitutional rights are under attack even more than during the Bush years.

For example:

Obama has presided over the most draconian crackdown on leaks in our history - even more so than Nixon.

As Marjorie Cohen - professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and past president of the National Lawyers Guild - writes at the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy:

Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is facing court-martial for leaking military reports and diplomatic cables to WikiLeaks, is being held in solitary confinement in Quantico brig in Virginia. Each night, he is forced to strip naked and sleep in a gown made of coarse material. He has been made to stand naked in the morning as other inmates walked by and looked. As journalist Lance Tapley documents in his chapter on torture in the supermax prisons in The United States and Torture, solitary confinement can lead to hallucinations and suicide; it is considered to be torture. Manning’s forced nudity amounts to humiliating and degrading treatment, in violation of U.S. and international law.

Nevertheless, President Barack Obama defended Manning’s treatment, saying, “I’ve actually asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures . . . are appropriate. They assured me they are.” Obama’s deference is reminiscent of President George W. Bush, who asked “the most senior legal officers in the U.S. government” to review the interrogation techniques. “They assured me they did not constitute torture,” Bush said.

***

After State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley criticized Manning’s conditions of confinement, the White House forced him to resign. Crowley had said the restrictions were “ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid.” It appears that Washington is more intent on sending a message to would-be whistleblowers than on upholding the laws that prohibit torture and abuse.

***

Torture is commonplace in countries strongly allied with the United States. Vice President Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s intelligence chief, was the lynchpin for Egyptian torture when the CIA sent prisoners to Egypt in its extraordinary rendition program. A former CIA agent observed, “If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear - never to see them again - you send them to Egypt.” In her chapter in The United States and Torture, New Yorker journalist Jane Mayer cites Egypt as the most common destination for suspects rendered by the United States.

As I pointed out in March:

Former constitutional law teacher Glenn Greenwald says that - in his defense of state secrecy, illegal spying, preventative detention, harassment of whistle-blowers and other issues of civil liberties - Obama is even worse than Bush.

Indeed, Obama has authorized “targeted assassinations” against U.S. citizens. Even Bush didn’t openly do something so abhorrent to the rule of law.

Obama is trying to expand spying well beyond the Bush administration’s programs. Indeed, the Obama administration is arguing that citizens should never be able to sue the government for illegal spying.

Obama’s indefinite detention policy is an Orwellian nightmare, which will create more terrorists.

Furthermore - as hard as it is for Democrats to believe - the disinformation and propaganda campaigns launched by Bush have onlyincreased under Obama. See this and this.

And as I pointed out last year:

According to Department of Defense training manuals, protest is considered “low-level terrorism”. And see this, this and this.

An FBI memo also labels peace protesters as “terrorists”.

***

A 2003 FBI memo describes protesters’ use of videotaping as an “intimidation” technique, even though - as the ACLU points out - “Most mainstream demonstrators often use videotape during protests to document law enforcement activity and, more importantly, deter police from acting outside the law.” The FBI appears to be objecting to the use of cameras to document unlawful behavior by law enforcement itself.

The Internet has been labeled as a breeding ground for terrorists, with anyone who questions the government’s versions of history being especially equated with terrorists.

Government agencies such as FEMA are allegedly teaching that the Founding Fathers should be considered terrorists.

The government is also using anti-terrorism laws to keep people from learning what pollutants are in their own community. See this, this and this.

Claims of “national security” are also used to keep basic financial information - such as who got bailout money - secret. That might not bode for particularly warm and friendly treatment for someone persistently demanding the release of such information.

The state of Missouri tried to label as terrorists current Congressman Ron Paul and his supporters, former Congressman Bob Barr, libertarians in general, anyone who holds gold, and a host of other people.

And according to a law school professor and former president of the National Lawyers Guild, pursuant to the Military Commissions Act:

Anyone who … speaks out against the government’s policies could be declared an “unlawful enemy combatant” and imprisoned indefinitely. That includes American citizens.

Obama has refused to reverse these practices.

There Is still a chance to stop it

The ACLU notes that there is some hope:

But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.

***

The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in.

***

Now is the time to stop this bad idea. Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

Source: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/238234-US-Congress-to-Vote-on-EXPLICITLY-Creating-a-Police-State