I can't wait! NDAA 2013 is just around the corner!

That's right, with all the hubb bubb of the presidential elections I almost forgot about the NDAA 2013! What does Washington DC have in store us for?

- Reauthorization of detaining American citizens without trial indefinitely? You betcha!

On Indefinite Detention: The Tyranny Continues

paul.house.gov...n

The bad news from last week's passage of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act is that Americans can still be arrested on US soil and detained indefinitely without trial. Some of my colleagues would like us to believe that they fixed last year's infamous Sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA, which codified into law the unconstitutional notion that some Americans are not subject to the protections of the Constitution. However, nothing in this year's bill or amendments to the bill restored those constitutional rights.

So what else? Anything new on the horizon? Come on Washington, wow me!

NDAA 2013: Congress approves domestic deceptive propaganda

rt.com...

An amendment tagged on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 would allow for the United States government to create and distribute pro-American propaganda within the country’s own borders under the alleged purpose of putting al-Qaeda’s attempts at persuading the world against Western ideals on ice. Former US representatives went out of there way to ensure their citizens that they’d be excluded from government-created media blasts, but two lawmakers currently serving the country are looking to change all that.

Congressmen Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Adam Smith (D-WA) introduced “The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012” (H.R. 5736) last week during discussions for the NDAA 2013. It was voted on by the US House of Representatives to be included in next year’s defense spending bill, which was then voted on as a whole and approved. The amendment updates the antiquated Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987, essentially clarifying that the US State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors may “prepare, disseminate and use public diplomacy information abroad,” but while also striking down a long-lasting ban on the domestic dissemination in America. For the last several decades, the federal government has been authorized to use such tactics overseas to influence foreign support of America’s wars abroad, but has been barred from such strategies within the US. If next year’s NDAA clears the US Senate and is signed by President Obama with the Thornberry-Smith provision intact, then restrictions on propaganda being force-fed to Americans would be rolled back entirety.

I know I know, that last source is RT but with any luck it's true and we do get ourselves some propaganda! It's not fair we spend billions yearly on propaganda for every country but the US. That all will change thanks to the NDAA 2013! Woot, we finally getting ours!



Obama is great and so is Romney

Future is looking bright! Drones have headlights!

Who would have guessed propeganda was defending us that makes sense.

I hear historical bells a tolling.

Time to start looking for a new country to live in ladies and gentlemen sad as it sounds.

Seems the people that are awake just sit at home well being awake idk.

reply to post by Swills


Thank you for posting this. NDAA 2013 has also recently been on my mind, though I have yet to delve into it. This should be interesting, especially considering the Third-person Effect and people’s misconceptions of how much propaganda really does influence them. But of course, if it won’t harm me, it shouldn’t be a problem huh?

I knooowww!!! I'm so excited!!! Eeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!! I cannot WAIT till I notice my first neighbor, friend, family member or townspeople disappear without explanation and never come back again!!

Did they commit suicide? Run away? Get murdered? Or did they get arrested for being a terrorist? Maybe put on Obama's Kill List? Who knows? You sure as heck don't! And you never will! That's all part of the fun!!!

"Dad! Where's mom??" "Gee, son... I dont know." "But dad, when will mom come back home!?" "I dont know that either son. But golly, aren't we having fun???

What is most fascinating to me about this detention thing is there were dozens of folks on this site who shouted the NDAA did not allow for the detaining of Americans. They shouted it over and over with proof if the text that they were right and everyone else was an alarmist.

So, a judge says the notion contained is a problem and stays it. You would think the apologists would claim the judges ruling was unnecessary and just done to appease the alarmists. But low and behold the government, who the apologists defend as being pro American protection, looks to block the stay, to allow for the detention of Americans.

I ask, to those who said it doesn't allow for the Americans to be detained - why is the government asking for it in their appeal?

reply to post by Swills


Futures so briight I gotta wear shades.

reply to post by Banananananana


No problem. Truth be told, the US has and clearly is already a victim of the DOD/CIA propaganda only now it will be totally legal! It used to be illegal for the CIA to do operations against US citizens and especially on US soil but no more! Thank you NDAA!

Operation Mockingbird

Operation Mockingbird was a secret Central Intelligence Agency campaign to influence media beginning in the 1950s.

The operation was first called Mockingbird in Deborah Davis' 1979 book, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and her Washington Post Empire. More evidence of Mockingbird's existence emerged in the 2007 memoir American Spy: My Secret History in the CIA, Watergate and Beyond, by convicted Watergate "plumber" E. Howard Hunt and The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America by Hugh Wilford (2008).[1]

reply to post by crankyoldman


The Gov't is fighting tooth and nail to keep the detention of Americans indefinitely. Judge Katherine Bolan Forrest ruled it unconstitutional but Washington DC says we'll find another federal judge to OK the NDAA and they did.

Our hero,

Katherine B. Forrest



Our patsy,

Raymond Lohier

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by crankyoldman

 

The Gov't is fighting tooth and nail to keep the detention of Americans indefinitely. Judge Katherine Bolan Forrest ruled it unconstitutional but Washington DC says we'll find another federal judge to OK the NDAA and they did.

Our hero,

Katherine B. Forrest

Our patsy,

Raymond Lohier

edit on 21-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)

The point is, it said detention of Americans all along, it always said that, in fact, that was written so clearly that those alarmists were right. So how could anyone say it didn't say it?

reply to post by Swills


Oh ya, I'm totally aware of that, and the 'covert' means by which it is, and has been used. I was just commenting on what would become a more overt means of propaganda dissemination, and how people would underestimate its influence on them; thus lead leading to an environment of acceptance. Obviously those in the ATS community (generalization) have a keener eye in regard what propaganda is, how it's used, and what is 'covert'. What we see as daily indoctrination and behavior modification, the populace sees as fair and balanced and freedom of choice, thus making it a normative behavior model and outlook. Not that I agree with everything this man says, but Noam Chomsky said it best in that propaganda is to a democracy what a bludgeon is to a totalitarian state. Subtlety is by nature a trait of 'democracy'.

reply to post by crankyoldman


I think you know exactly how people could say it didn’t . People don't want to care in one form or another, and in a hyperbolic sense, because this is America, f*** ya! The perceptions of this country skew the reality of it. In addition, the discourse on the NDAA 2012 was not exactly ideal either; not that I have any real hopes of people listening objectively and doing their due diligence.

Absent the detention issue, RT really spun that amendment in my opinion. Opening up and actually seeing what propaganda we are pushing is a good thing. Prior to this amendment, the United States via any Department charged with spreading 'our' message was able to keep their spin locked up; not so much so now. The amendment gives an avenue to request such media (material older than the effective date needs to be over 12 years old).

Outside the ridiculous mission of promoting freedom and liberty via propaganda and not by our very nature, this amendment seems to be benign on its service.

I say stick to the real issues that are buried in the NDAA and I am not really seeing how this is something that is detrimental to the citizen's of these United States.

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by crankyoldman

 

The Gov't is fighting tooth and nail to keep the detention of Americans indefinitely. Judge Katherine Bolan Forrest ruled it unconstitutional but Washington DC says we'll find another federal judge to OK the NDAA and they did.

Our hero,

Katherine B. Forrest

Our patsy,

Raymond Lohier

edit on 21-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)

Don't the shadows look strange in the Lohier image?
Here is another (of the very few) google image of Lohier, slightly enlarged.



It doesn't take a genius to spot the issues with this photograph. Something is
not right here! It has all the appearances of a composite/faked image.
Someone needs to prove to me that these are in fact two living breathing individuals
and not photoshop composites/creations, as i suspect they are. A google image search
shows up very few results for both, but doesn't forrest expression remarkably similar in all
representations found?



This is a composite image. The chin, mouth and eyes are pasted in and there
are numerous other indications here that this photograph (and this person?) is a fake!

I believe the U.S. has longsince been pencilled in for destruction from within. Are
these fabricated stories designed to add fuel to the fire, and accelerate the masses
towards revolution?

Is there any video available for both these individuals?

I think maybe we're in way worse shape than most would ever realize, if this is true...

Unfortunately, despite the nominal commitment to compliance with the Constitution, legislators and officials have failed to comply with it in many instances. Most of these instances were justified as necessary to deal with perceived crises, especially war and depression. Some of these instances include the Dick Act of 1903 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. But perhaps the most important was the Emergency Banking Act of March 9, 1933, and particularly its amendment to the Trading with the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917, and its ratification of such executive orders as the Proclamation 2040 by President Roosevelt issued on March 6, 1933, sometimes called the Emergency and War Powers order. This act, codified as 12 USC 95(b), effectively declared the Constitution suspended and conferred dictatorial powers on the President, a situation which continues to this day.
www.constitution.org...

I found this while looking up Executive Orders as Color of Law. That is what Executive Orders falls under.

Color of law. "The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right.'
famguardian.org...

I guess what I'm saying is, as long as they have the Might, in their eyes they have the Right.

And who is going to stop them?

reply to post by Godhood


Consider Russia. It is thriving financially, freedom has been restored, and it is quite safe outside the major cities. Of course you will need to learn the language, and of course have enough money to satisfy their financial requirements. I'd go but I'm poor. The reason for my going is my mom's parents were from Russia. Of course I like it cold, and that is a sure thing in most of Russia.

I find it hilarious how complimentary and praising Obama/Romney drones are until the NDAA is brought up, then they have nothing to say.


It is rather disappointing how gullible so many ATS posters are nowadays, cheerleading the two party system. Has ATS has lost its soul?