The Most Important Lawsuit in American History that No One is Talking About

And people think that standing against the government for this constitutes treason? If I say the government should be ousted because they are not operating within their bounds, I am a terrorist. Well I am saying it. All of those involved in pushing this on the government side should be tried for treason, and then executed for crimes against the state. This is ridiculous, and it is definitely not a democracy. What right do they have to trample on the US Constitution? Which was put in place after so much blood was spilled gaining independence and establishing a nation. Who are they to ruin it? To disobey it? This is treason of the highest order, and if it is coming from the highest office, the president needs to be tried for treason as well. Congress needs to get off their asses right now and do something, for the people. The interests of the people are not being represented. And a lot of people in the government need to pay for it, dearly. This is a game to them apparently, and the people should not take this crap anymore.

Originally posted by Seagle- Libertyblitzkrieg

The guardian

edit on 12-8-2012 by Seagle because: (no reason given)

First of all, I have issue with the sites you are linking us to.

Liberyblitzkrieg? Is that some NEO nazi crap? What the hell, I mean 'come on?

And then a UK site to tell Americans how to think?

Oh, Jesus, some people are just too bored!

Originally posted by Sulie

Originally posted by Seagle- Libertyblitzkrieg

The guardian

edit on 12-8-2012 by Seagle because: (no reason given)

First of all, I have issue with the sites you are linking us to.

Liberyblitzkrieg? Is that some NEO nazi crap? What the hell, I mean 'come on?

And then a UK site to tell Americans how to think?

Oh, Jesus, some people are just too bored!

First of all the Guardian is a a good newspaper as far as papers go. Second of all:

• This article was commissioned by the DAILY CLOUDT and appears here by permission of the editors

Eta: The woman who originally wrote this article!:

Jennifer "Tangerine" Bolen is the founder and Executive Director of RevolutionTruth, an organization dedicated to restoring legitimate democracies in part through increasing access to accurate information. Ms Bolen has a background in integrative medicine, she holds a Master's degree in Public Health and Policy and has done the core coursework for a PhD in public affairs and governance.

i think you should read peoples links before accusing them of being neo-nazi's. :shk:

Originally posted by Seagle
It doesn't get any more blatant than this and people need to pull their heads out of the sand right now.

To quote a too often used response around here:

"Well; if you're not doing anything wrong ...what's the problem"???

This is exactly what I rant on about. Wake up. Sorry You too can be a criminal if they deem you to be one.

Originally posted by Wide-Eyes

No, no, and no. You sites are not reliable.

The Guardian is akin to Faux news.

Bring us something meatier, otherwise, this is all propaganda crap.

reply to post by Sulie


And so are you for reading about bored people!

It's all over the net from different sources. Take your head out of the sand. Remove the sand from your eyes and type "Section 1021 of the NDAA" this is google and view the results.

I am not American, but I hope thiey (the evil that lives within your country) will loose in court.

reply to post by macaronicaesar


Wonderful. Just wonderful. Truer words could not be told. We are just little robots doing what we are told.
I hope that more people will just listen fully what was said. At least I hope so.

reply to post by Seagle


Next time, finish your post please.

You're welcome.


"To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes."

Subtitle D—Counterterrorism

SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF
THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS
PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the
President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to
the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40;
50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces
of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section
is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided
the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported
al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged
in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,
including any person who has committed a belligerent act or
has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
forces.
(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a
person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may
include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until
the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for
Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States
Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009
(title XVIII of Public Law 111–84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent
tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country
of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.
(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is intended to limit
or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the
Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed
to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of
United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States,
or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United
States.
(f) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.—The Secretary
of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application
of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of subsection (b)(2).

Source

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Do you see the first word in this document after "Sec. 1021"? It's "Affirmation" Meaning that they are affirming what they already did for the purpose of appropriating funds in THIS fiscal year. This is August buddy. Do the math. Not only is this document close to a year old, but it's a re-hash of previous documents of years past. Documents updated for the purpose of keeping money coming into the war machine via Congress who appropriates the funds. You do know how the system works don't you? Well, you do now.

Making the leap between what the military does and what concerns average civilians is a pretty big one. Jose Padilla wasn't average and if you don't know that by now, I'm sorry. This pissing match has been going on since 2006 and I STILL don't see martial law being imposed. This is a money racket OP. This has nothing to do with controlling the populace.

Quit being paranoid.

"The Most Important Lawsuit in American History"?

I thought Starbucks was suing Direct TV.

That's all most people care about.

Originally posted by mwood
"The Most Important Lawsuit in American History"?

I thought Starbucks was suing Direct TV.

That's all most people care about.

Well, where have YOU been hiding?

That lawsuit? First I've heard about it. No details though, please.

Which side of fence are you on anyway?

Originally posted by mikelkhall
Revolution will never happen because the majority of the people are too content to just follow whatever leader is put in front of them. Most of the people here, on ATS, that say things like "It's time to fight back" will never fight back because they lack the moral backbone to do so.

It's very easy to sit in your home and type words that sound fantastic and all rebellious and patriotic but it's another matter to actually do something about it. I'm guilty of the same thing also.

If there were going to be a revolution it should have happened long before now. Our rights are being stripped away on a daily basis but we are too busy fighting each other to be bothered about something as silly as the Constitution. "The Powers that be", whoever they are, have us so busy fighting racism and bigotry that we don't stand a chance.

Unfortunately, this is par for the course.

I don't know of any time historically that any large group of Americans banned together to fight an injustice without an identifiable leader.

Americans are sheeple, as well as people from the rest of the world. People have to be herded, motivated and instructed. Everyone is waiting for the next guy to do something. Until you have someone that is willing to stick his neck out and manage not to get it cut off, then you might see some people acting with him his next attempt.

If he is able to gather a large enough group, he may have someone to step into his shoes when he is brought to ground. He will have become a martyr and a rallying point for maybe even more followers.

In the real world you have leaders and you have followers, better known as sheeple. As you can see we are long on followers but there is an extreme shortage of leaders.

No one is really stepping up. You have your internet talkers/bloggers, your radio hosts/talking heads, but there is no one standing on the front-line. The sheep are waiting to be led.

reply to post by Seagle


This has been headlining on rt.com for a while now. Folks need to get their news from all available sources. I think executive orders must be in place here in the US to keep this kind of thing out of the news. Do you remember what happened to any who spoke out against the wars?

Seems to me this is some of the most important legislation in our 200+ years!

NDAA on trial: White House refuses to abide with ban against indefinite detention of Americans
rt.com...

Obama fights ban on indefinite detention of Americans
rt.com...

It is a sad day when we find more fairness/openness in the Russian Media!

Current US regime is very much inspired by the Germans during the second world war.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


They are appealing the ruling which means the enforcement of that provision is not an option right. I still maintain the ruling we saw is going to be upheld (unconstitutional). This is not the first time this topic has come up in our nations history and the rulings have been consistent.

They can appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court however all we have to do is look at their rulings over the last 10 years for the answers (farthr back if you want more evidence that what they want to do is a no go).

If people dont want to rely on the courts then they should take the time to write their representatives and voice their concerns. In the time it takes to post on here they can easily copy and paste their opinion and send it off.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
reply to post by Seagle

 

Shhhhhhhhh,, you are not supposed to try and Wake the Masses,, they are sleeping.


Yes, I have waited and waited to see any kind of real response to this,, but America doesn't care,, it is too busy being worried that I might want to marry someone of the same sex, or what Lindsey Lohan is doing,, or maybe Madonna and Lady Gaga..

Shhhhhhhhh that is not important,,, American Idol is On..

I can not speak for all the states in the United States but step one in the Government V Citizens, the government have to disarm us first. In my State of Texas we are cocked and locked and ready to go. Let them bring the fight us with the home town advantage. Our own Govenor will tell you that we are so well armed in Texas that we can raise a full blown army in 24 hours or less throughout the state.

By the way, we won't be taking any prisoners. As far as your mocking us, if you don't have a dog in the fight, please keep your ass on the porch and your rude comments to yourself. For many of us, we've been preparing for this fight for years. Trust me, we're ready! When the federal government gets ready to jump, it's game on.

We know about the court cases and the chicken # judges. They're just trying to stay alive but once the job is done, their butts belong to us and they will have to find a new job.

@Xcathdra

I agree this is likely to be defeated and ultimately put down by the Supreme Court. I think it will have to get that far and I'm actually surprised it hit the courts this quickly and moving right on up the chain. I would have thought getting this run up would be a thing the Government would want to delay, not seemingly write their appeal the day before they lost this round last week. Odd about that..they actually expect this Super Court particularly, to find in their favor? Well.. Judgement hasn't been the Governments strong suit here lately. I do love some of the Judge though. The Courthouse News site carried extensive quotes from the attorney's and Judge, which is apparently what they do. You might find a couple interesting.... I know I did and beyond any disagreement we may have had on the other notes.

He later drew a line between that case and the Authorization to Use Military Force, or AUMF, which allowed the government to kill or detain suspected Sept. 11, 2001, plotters days after the attacks.

The government claims that judicial interpretations of the AUMF made it identical to the NDAA.

Torrance asserted that the United States does not differentiate under which authority it holds military detainees, even in its current policy.

Judge Forrest said that if this claim is true, the government could be found in contempt of court for violating orders prohibiting detention under the NDAA.

(spacing for clarity of reading)

Asked whether that language would chill the right to associate, Torrance replied that nobody would be detained for "peacefully standing in Afghanistan" while "Osama bin Laden walks by."
"He can't walk by any more," Forrest noted dryly.

Source

Gotta love that Judge... Although the flippant attitude of the Government presenting this and the reasoning is downright disturbing. The language is so vague as I'm reading the quotes of what was argued last week, that they could almost include us here if, say, we'd had extended chats with someone who turned out to be what they called Al Qaeda. It's unnerving..... I don't mind one bit that it gets to the Super Court quick, personally. I just wonder why they seem to want that too? Oh well..... good riddens when it gets the Super Gavel.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
reply to post by Seagle

 

Shhhhhhhhh,, you are not supposed to try and Wake the Masses,, they are sleeping.


Yes, I have waited and waited to see any kind of real response to this,, but America doesn't care,, it is too busy being worried that I might want to marry someone of the same sex, or what Lindsey Lohan is doing,, or maybe Madonna and Lady Gaga..

Shhhhhhhhh that is not important,,, American Idol is On..

Thread over and done.

PS: You forgot all the racist crap too. They gotta keep that pot stirred so we're too busy hating each to look up and notice who's pulling the strings. Divide and conquer, as they say.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


The reason its been able to move through the system so quickly is because the underlying issue is a constitutional one. For something of this magnitude the challenge must come before the standing. Its not enough to have a person held under the law only to be held in legal limbo while it makes its way through the courts.

People must understand the legal history in all of this. They do not understand, in my opinion, what the issue is. There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that prevents the US Military from being used in civilan law enforcement functions.

Posse Commitatus only came about at the end of the Civil war. It was put into place because of the issue present at the time for Southern states and their rejoining the Union.

Because Posse Commitatus was enacted by Congress, Congress can modify the law at any time. This is another reason why case law / previous rulings are key to this challenge.

man this sh*t is ridiculous. look how little they give a f*ck about you & me. we can't even discuss how damn psycho they are & how much we hate & disagree with this dumbass policy without being labeled a terrorist smh. then they can come to my home in my sleep & bag me up & ill never be seen again smh. they need to be stopped.

Originally posted by thirdeyevision
then they can come to my home in my sleep & bag me up & ill never be seen again

Question....

What makes you think the government even knows or cares who you are?
What makes you think the government sees you as anyone special?
Why do you think the government cares about you to the extent of coming to get you in the middle of the night?

As for the rest and your final comment of needing to be stopped.

The government can be easily stopped. It requires people to get off their lazy asses and do something more than just bitching about the problem.

Its like walking outside in the middle of a thunderstorm.. You stand in the elements bitching about getting wet, demanding something be done about it, while continuing to just stand there, seemingly gripped in confusion and inaction because you make the issue out to be way more complex than it really is.