, , , ,

Update: March 4, 2012

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal, rt.com, Feb. 29, 2012


“The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it. The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday [the US Senate already passed the bill on February 6.], a bill which is being dubbed the “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011.’ ”

“The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene…Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.

“Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Making it a federal offense to even accidentally disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.”

“In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense…”

“When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.”

March 1, 2012

This Website is a Belligerant Act, belligerantact.com, Dec. 31, 2011


“Can the US government now proclaim that the constitutionally protected act of protest against the government is a ‘belligerent act’ and legally lock up those who participate in such a protest?”

“For the purposes of defining what a ‘belligerent act’ is, with respect to a US citizen, how does the government differentiate between an act of war against the United States vs. a lawful protest against the government? Prior to this Act, such a distinction would have to be decided in a court of law by a jury of a citizen’s peers. With the signing of the NDAA, the government is claiming the right to decide this unilaterally, without any judicial proceedings and no legal representation afforded to the accused. Does that sound like a government of the people, by the people, and for the people? ”

“The primary founding principle of the United States is that of the Rule of Law. Rule of Law does not mean ‘rule’ as in the rules of a game. Rule of Law means that, rather than being ruled by the arbitrary dictates of a powerful man, we are ruled, each of us, by a common set of laws that are the same for everyone, everywhere, all the time. These laws are agreed upon through a public democratic process and they are written down for everyone to see. The Constitution of the United States is the basis of all US law and it lays out the essential precepts of the Rule of Law.”

“Under the Rule of Law and under the Constitution, citizens of the United States are presumed innocent until deemed guilty of a crime by a jury of their peers. Under the Rule of Law and under the Constitution, no citizen of the United States can be incarcerated without recourse to legal counsel and the justice system in a timely manner. These principles are what separate the Rule of Law from dictatorship. It is precisely the inability of powerful men to impose their will arbitrarily on the less powerful that makes Rule of Law mean RULE of LAW.

“Think it doesn’t really matter and that protesting this act is alarmist and paranoid? It may not matter in practice in this moment, but when principle is compromised in a nation founded on principle, then what is left of that nation?”

The NDAA: a clear and present danger to American liberty, by Naomi Wolf, The Guardian, Feb. 29, 2012


“The US is sleepwalking into becoming a police state, where, like a pre-Magna Carta monarch, the president can lock up anyone…And with a new bill now being introduced to make it a crime to protest in a way that disrupts any government process – or to get close to anyone with secret service protection – the push to legally lock down the United Police States is in full force.”

“Overstated? Let’s be clear: the NDAA grants the president the power to kidnap any American anywhere in the United States and hold him or her in prison forever without trial. The president’s own signing statement, incredibly, confirmed that he had that power. As I have been warning since 2006: there is not a country on the planet that you can name that has ever set in place a system of torture, and of detention without trial, for an “other”, supposedly external threat that did not end up using it pretty quickly on its own citizens. ”

“As former Reagan official, now Ron Paul supporter, Bruce Fein points out, on 1 March, we won’t just lose the bill of rights; we will lose due process altogether. We will be back at the place where we were, in terms of legal tradition, before the signing of the Magna Carta – when kings could throw people in prison at will, to rot there forever.”

“If we had cared more about what was being done to brown people with Muslim names on a Cuban coastline, and raised our voices louder against their having been held without charge for years, or against their being tried in kangaroo courts called military tribunals, we might now be safer now from a new law mandating for us also the threat of abduction and fear of perpetual incarceration.”

“He [Shahid Buttar] points out that it gives future presidents the power to arrest their political critics. That may even be understating things: it is actually, in my view, the worst threat to civil liberty in the US since habeas corpus was last suspended, during the American civil war.”

“What will happen next? I wrote recently that the US is experiencing something like a civil war, with only one side at this point – the corporatist side – aggressing. This grassroots, local-leader movement represents a defensive strategy in what is being now tacitly recognized as unprovoked aggression against an entire nation, and an entire people…The local resistance to the police state goes further: midwestern cities, such as Chicago and Minneapolis, are considering “torture-free city” resolutions that would prohibit the torture which civil libertarians see as likely under a military detention regime expanded by the NDAA.”

Stop The NDAA : sign to send letters to your Congresspeople to support the lawsuit against the President. Support Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, Daniel Ellsberg, and Birgitta Jonsdottir in suing the United States Government to stop the implementation of the NDAA – It’s set to take effect on March 1, 2012.

NDAA Is Now In Effect, And Many Are Terrified, David Seaman, businessinsider.com, March 1, 2012


“But wait… Obama signed a new ‘policy directive’ which fixes the problem, right? Well, actually no. Don’t fall for the PR ploy.”

“As RT explained yesterday, ‘The signing could indeed bring a cease to the requirementof military detainment for alleged adversaries of America, a requirement that is authorized under Section 1022 of the act. It does not, however, squash the indefinite detention without trial provision of Section 1021, nor does it negate the fact that the US government has already allowed itself to approve a nasty legislation that denounces the civil liberties of every American and has marred the administration of a president who campaigned on upholding constitutional rights. ”

Obama Can Now Imprison You For Life WITHOUT Trial Or Charges: David Seaman on RT discussing the NDAA

“Obama’s ‘waiver’ and new ‘policy directive’ released yesterday in response to growing NDAA outrage unfortunately is a PR ploy, and does little to mitigate the real danger to our civil liberties posed by the NDAA’s indefinite detention provisions. Those in Congress who voted for NDAA must be peacefully removed from office via one-time special recall, or voted out.”

This Website is a Belligerent Act