Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: S.1867 allows Military to Intern Americans without Charges

Posted 11 years ago on Nov. 26, 2011, 9:23 p.m. EST by PublicCurrency (1387)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Telephone your Senators on Monday . . . Do not support this bill

The Senate is set to vote on a bill next week that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

“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,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.

Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor Monday, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by jz12345 (6) 11 years ago

Obama also said he would close GITMO, and collected a Nobel Peace Prize for that... I for one cannot figure out what is conservative or liberal any more... Recently I found myself simultaneously agreeing with Chomsky and Alex Jones, who both consider our regime corporatocracy. Who would have thunk we would sink that low... Joseph Zernik, PhD Human Rights Alert (NGO) http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

It is time to write off the whole system.

Obama did it for me, enough. The entire government is completely cooped by the corporate establishment. We must work long term to get rid of the whole rotten system.

The ruling class will do what it is going to do. We must struggle for a new path, not become involved in this decaying system, it would be a waste of our time and resources.

One point on this new crackdown law, the UN has sent a letter to Obama telling him they are going to begin an investigation of the crackdown on OWS. How this pertains; S 1867 is really about OWS not terrorism.

When we begin to stop paying our student loans, than credit cards, than mortgages and other bills, their banking system will begin to collapse. At that point they will declare those of us in debt as terrorists.

[-] 2 points by CurveOfBindingEnergy (165) 11 years ago

The REAL reason Obama will veto:

Military prisoners get protection of Geneva convention. That means no torture allowed. Can't have that!


[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (5843) 11 years ago

Senators Reid and Feinstein have introduced an amendment, that would prevent the application of the detention of citizens provision of 1867.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

We MUST MUST MUST light up the telephone wires CONTACTING our so-called representatives.

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (5843) 11 years ago

Hi Public, The amendment is S.AMDT.1456, and has already passed. It prevents application of detention provision of 1867, without due process. http:www.opencongress.org/vote/2011/s/215

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

That is controversial. . .

Feinstein was able to include an amendment which states that “nothing in the bill changes current law relating to the detention of U.S. citizens and legal aliens,” but this measure is meaningless according to Republican Congressman Justin Amash, a fierce critic of the bill.

“Some have asserted that Sen. Feinstein’s amendment, S Amdt 1456, protects the rights of American citizens and preserves constitutional due process. Unfortunately, it does not. It’s just more cleverly worded nonsense,” Though the White House has threatened to veto the bill, the fact that Obama administration lawyers yesterday reaffirmed their backing for state sponsored assassination of U.S. citizens would suggest otherwise. Not voting for the bill, or in other words upholding the oath to protect the Constitution, has been described over and over again as “political suicide”.

“The bill puts military detention authority on steroids and makes it permanent, American citizens and others are at greater risk of being locked away by the military without charge or trial,” said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

As Spencer Ackerman highlights, the bill completely violates the sixth amendment in that it allows American citizens to be locked up indefinitely, including in a foreign detention center, without any burden of proof whatsoever. An American merely has to be declared a terrorist and they can be abducted off the streets and never seen again.

“The detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority,” writes Ackerman.


[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (5843) 11 years ago

Hi Public, Thank you for reply. Smoke and mirrors, very confusing.

Wish site would do something about thread vandals (picture thing).

Best Regards, Nevada

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Hi Nevada, I find it confusing, as well, but IMHO we should remain vigilant. Contacting our reps (so-called) and letting our voices be heard. It really does make a difference, many times. Best Regards, PublicCurrency

[-] 1 points by Windsofchange (1044) 11 years ago

Here is a little info I posted on my thread. Just to keep you up-to-date on what is going on. It is very sneaky how they passed this bill. Please read below. So now I really hope that President Obama vetos this bill.

URGENT UPDATE: It will be added into an already approved bill--The Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. Here is the info on the bill. They will be working to resolved the differences. The M.C.A.A. passed in the House back in May 2011 with 322 yeas to 96 nays. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1540 After the House resolved the differences of the two bills then it will go to President Obama to approve. Everyone call your House Reps and write to President Obama--get the word out that you strongly disapprove of this bill. Spread the word and make your voices heard on this. Thanks.

Please call these House Representatives who were just appointed to review and resolve the difference between each bill. Tell them how you feel about section 1031-1032 of the S. 1867 bill.

On Dec 7, 2011: The Speaker appointed conferees - from the Committee on Armed Services for consideration of the House bill and the Senate amendment, and modifications committed to conference: McKeon, Bartlett, Thornberry, Akin, Forbes, Miller (FL), LoBiondo, Turner (OH), Kline, Rogers (AL), Shuster, Conaway, Wittman, Hunter, Rooney, Schilling, Griffin (AR), West, Smith (WA), Reyes, Sanchez, Loretta, McIntyre, Andrews, Davis (CA), Langevin, Larsen (WA), Cooper, Bordallo, Courtney, Loebsack, Tsongas, and Pingree (ME).*


[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Everyone call your House Reps and write to President Obama--get the word out that you strongly disapprove of this bill. Spread the word and make your voices heard on this.

[-] 1 points by Windsofchange (1044) 11 years ago

I hope and pray that President Obama vetos this, but I have been hearing alot of things lately suggesting he won't. Nevertheless, we need to remain vigilant and proactive.

I forward you the list of House reps on the Committee on Armed Service. Spread the words to everyone to call these guys.

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 11 years ago

You would think that this is one issue that the Tea Party and we could agree on!

[-] 1 points by Windsofchange (1044) 11 years ago

It has been on my mind. That OWS, The Tea Party people, The Constitutionists and who ever else would join us should all be out there by the thousands protesting on Capitol Hill and then the White House. This is something that calls for a large number of people joining forces and protesting. There is just too much at stake.

[-] 1 points by GSA (1) 11 years ago

Our liberties are being threatened by the minute. Is there a way for us to begin a grassroots movement to clean out Congress? I mean like a real door to door campaign to replace each congress person who has failed to protect our rights. This would require looking at the current representatives’ voting records with close scrutiny and bringing forth our own people (meaning from the 99%) to fill in their seats so that we are really represented on the Hill. Of course the new people elected should have a good record of fighting for our liberties and speaking out against the injustices that had taken place over the past decades (real civil rights and human rights activists).

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

door to door is very effective - walking the precincts - really does work.

Our liberties are being removed.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 11 years ago

Obama already said he's going to veto it..


Even the Washington Times admits he'll veto it. A right-wing hate rag that makes the New York Post seem civil.

[-] 3 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

I wouldn't trust any of them - untill it has been vetoed.

Naomi Wolf wrote "The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy," published on Nov. 25th, in the U.K. but not here.

The violent police assaults across the US are no coincidence. Occupy has touched the third rail of our political class's venality.


[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

Like your comment, but see mine above. There are enough votes in the Senate to override the veto and keep the political heat off Obama.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

The REAL reason Obama will veto:

Military prisoners get protection of Geneva convention. That means no torture allowed. Can't have that!


[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

PC, since this thread started, the local Pacifica Station in NYC, WBAI 99.5 has been reporting that this was Obama's idea from the get go. The Dems and Repubs in Congress have taken so much heat over this bill, that Obama's administration has suggested changes and they will pass it as a different bill.

[-] 2 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Glad to read that the local Pacifica Station in NYC, WBAI 99.5 has been covering this issue. Everyone I talk to hasn't heard anything about it.

IMHO the Obama administration is GW Bush 2 on steroids.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 11 years ago

I agreed with the article till the last couple paragraphs..

I also got caught up into the notion of congress members inside trading for personal benefit. But when I researched their forms from opensecrets, all their investments were in place long before they would have profited and some were misrepresented.

Other than that, it's a thought-provoking article. Especially considering the fact that I can't find it being syndicated in any reputable American news source. That's pretty strange for an article written by an American, for a prestigious tabloid, about American matters.. Maybe Chomsky was right?

[-] 2 points by SayNO2GovInc (99) 11 years ago

Obama is the one who wanted indefinite detention for FUTURE crimes. Maybe it's a campaign tactic, he can be a hero and veto, or not. America is closing ya know. We really shouldn't have to worry about a Constitutional lawyer trashing the Constitution, but we really do. I don't trust a word he says, or Congress for that matter, most are just traitors. Obama says one thing then does a lot of the opposite. Like he promised to end wars? Iraq war is still on, US troops are merely being replaced with private security. or close Guantanamo? He didn't. or tell lobbyists their days of calling the shots was over? He appointed 17 to gov jobs in first 14 days of being sworn in, I lost count nearing 50 lobbyists... this is the guy that told us all to swim in and eat poison (Gulf of Mexico is NOT safe, it is dying!).

The Senate passed it, confirmed the Police State, no Freedom, Liberty is lost and totalitarianism has arrived. The traitorous Patriot Act does all that but this adds military, they really want to quiet dissent, and we need to be really loud. Give Me Liberty! http://saynotocorporateamerica.blogspot.com/

[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

The veto is simply his political "get out of jail free" card.

The margin of the Senate vote, the Democratic Senate, and the house vote will be enough to override the veto.

This way Obama will not have to take the political heat from the lay "liberals" in his party.

But he wants this. Just like the crackdowns on the Movement, the terrorist establishment hit San Fran today; If Obama wanted to, he could stop this. But he wants it. He can blame the local officials.

But he has the power to stop it but does not use it. Just like Ike and JFK used the military to force the integration of schools in the south. Obama could order the National Guard to protect the Occupation.

But this is not what he wants. We are a threat to his contributors.

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 11 years ago

"But he has the power to stop it but does not use it. Just like Ike and JFK used the military to force the integration of schools in the south. Obama could order the National Guard to protect the Occupation."

I'm pretty sure the Governor needs to hand control of the National Guard(a state-entity controlled by the Governor) before Obama could do that. Don't quote me on that, but I'm pretty sure.

[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

No, the Governor does not have to authorize. The local Police Chiefs, the County Sheriffs and the National Guard take an oath to the follow Presidential orders over the State's wishes. I this this changed during the 1880's and 1890's during the period of "incorporation" of our legal system.

I suggest to all people to read about this period of our history. It was the final nail that started during the Civil War of making sure the Federal Government is in control.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 11 years ago

So if the Police Chiefs answer to the president, why would FDR send in the National Guard??

[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

Police Chiefs, and County Sheriffs, only answer to the President when he issues a Presidential order.

As far as the National Guard, if the President wants a state to feel his power I would think the National Guard is the way to go.

[-] 1 points by Hobohemian (260) 11 years ago

Apparently a group of Democrat Senators have betrayed America by supporting this law. What a sad day in the life of this Republic, almost as shameful as the Citizens United decision. Some people don't understand that just because the government says somebody is a "terrorist", it doesn't mean that he/she is trying to hurt anybody. The government abuses any power you give it. Conservatives are supposed to know that, but a lot of them buy into the b.s. I know that a lot of the Ron Lawl people and the Alex Jones people and even some Tea Party are up in arms about this; we should be in solidarity with them too if we have a common complaint. A very serious complaint.

[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

I do not think they betrayed their real masters at all. We are a threat to the corporate capitalist Establishment and their power structure. They want to kill the Movement while it is still small. They see the long term potential of what can be done.

Also, they now can see we have no intentions of stopping. S 1867 is one of the reactions on their part. More brutal and vicious are coming.

[-] 2 points by Hobohemian (260) 11 years ago

I agree, and I hear that the FEMA camps are going up too, I dunno how seriously I take that but Jesus who knows with how crazy this country has become. And they did it to 100,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII. I am glad for the existence of groups such as "Oath Keepers" and for the people at Occupy working to set up our own intra-net, because their first war is against information. They have declared war on the American people already, in 1932 in Washington D.C. when they fired on the Bonus Army made up of our Veterans of WWI. FDR and that progressive movement put some life back into the country, gave us tools to rebuild the nation. Now their grandchildren are making the bet that people aren't as awake as they were in that particular depression and that Americans don't value their freedom anymore enough to fight for it. I'm gambling that they're wrong.

[-] 1 points by tbuontempo (194) from Jersey City, NJ 11 years ago

I am with you. Long Term.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

This is what we need SOLUTIONS and ACTION !

The sheriff in his/her turf has more power than the president:

If only we can get the sheriff (has more power than the president in his/her turf) to arrest these bastards, that would be great. We just have to inform the non-bought out sheriffs to be aware of their powers under the US Constitution. See some links below about this power:


http://youtube.com/watch?v=oxoqw6gWVdo (Part 1/5 )

http://youtube.com/watch?v=h-_uGjZiyE8&NR=1 (Part2/5 )

http://youtube.com/watch?v=EGBEvE28q5Y&NR=1 (Part 3/5 )

http://youtube.com/watch?v=LJSUAJFOfp8&NR=1 (Part4/5 )

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NdI2Pb-gBSs&NR=1 (Part5/5)

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

also check on this:

Sheriff Richard Mack speaks candidly about the project to train sheriffs across the nation to understand and fulfill their constitutional duties.


[-] 1 points by vothmr (82) from Harrisonburg, VA 11 years ago

this is already in the books. the president at any time can enable the military to conduct policing operations on US soil. also, when marshal law in enacted the US can suspend the right to a speedy trial and can hold people. its been around forever. chill out people

[-] 1 points by jsigur (3) 11 years ago

save me a spot near the outhouse!

[-] 1 points by radicalcanary (1) 11 years ago

Did any of you read the bill? Always find the bills and read them. Look at it under UNITED STATES CITIZENS section 1 and 2 . There is a clause that says it does not pertain to American citizens. Can you explain to me why no one is telling the full truth about this bill. I do not like our government but it makes you and anyone else no better than them if you fudge the truth and lie to people. Is there something I am missing? Because I just read the bill. I will say, that I would like no more bills to pass but all of us need to be truthful Peace SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War- (1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war. (2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined-- (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and (B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners. (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033. (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States. (b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens- (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States. (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

[-] 1 points by theCheat (85) 11 years ago

And which party is in charge of the Senate? (hint: same party that has the white house)

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Both parties are working for the one thousandth of one percent IMHO. They are like two wings on the same hideous bird.

[-] 1 points by BryanTim (1) 11 years ago

With the exception of Ron Lawl, your average republican AND democrat does not understand, believe in or care about The Bill Of Rights. Patriotic American's in the U.S. Military should NOT fight for this government. The real threat(s) to our freedom(s) are in Washington, D.C.

[-] 1 points by Waka (1) from New York, NY 11 years ago

PEOPLE UNITE Learn FROM AFRICANS Look at how they ROLL: Carnival Time Drums Beautiful Costumes Make up Royal UNITED with LOVE Music coordination singing the same song .. U n i t y ck it Il n'y a pas de mouvement sans rythme ..

[-] 1 points by itsafreeman (2) 11 years ago

Those of us who recognized 9/11 as a false flag operation expected this. As part of the boiling frog strategy, they waited 10 years to play this card. These internments can also involve torture. It's the new inquisition.

The folks who brought us the first inquisition set up the central banks, all of them.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago


[-] 1 points by Timbrewolf1 (2) 11 years ago

Where have you been? The Patriot Act, the Military Commisions Act, and various Executive Orders already allow this. Cheney's declaration of "the war on terror" set the foundation for the US to be in a state of war and, subsequently, under Marshall Law in perpetuity. Where were you? 

This year Obama ordered a "hit" on a US pastor. Did you catch that one? Oh, and the "collateral damage" was the pastors two teenage sons. All dead. All Obama.

Congress is simply stacking the laws now in unlikely event that the Supreme Court will find one of them objectionable. 

One word: revolution. Good luck.

[-] 1 points by myrddinstarhawk (1) from San Jose, CA 11 years ago

if this bill passes it will allow the military to intervene in any occupy event and declare us domestic terrorists. they can then arrest and detain us just because they think we "MAY BE" terrorists. they don't need Any proof beyond a personal belief. and they can hold us without just cause or due process for as long as they want.

this bill will place us in a military controlled martial law state with no recourse and no out. its like they are trying to force the country into a civil upriseing

[-] 1 points by SeanSutherland (1) 11 years ago

"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

[-] 1 points by Renifer (1) 11 years ago

If Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) supports this bill, then I am definitely against it. Graham and his wife (who lobbies illegally) are the architects the bills that tanked our economy, deregulating Wall Street. Now they want to deregulate the military and end the Posse Comitatus laws? No way. Nothing doing. No thank you. America is not a battlefield, nor should it become one. This is the quickest and surest way to a police state and a real battlefield that I can think of.

[-] 1 points by mcelchap (1) 11 years ago

Uncle Sam wishes to far exceed Hitler & Stalin in using secret police methods to dismember society to shape it in the image of the fascist state. My dignity does not allow me to be controlled like a robot, so I'm in danger. You? S. 1867 is a monstrously evil bill that should foment angry responses everywhere. Live free or die!

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 11 years ago

wow, turns out alex jones isnt paranoid at all...funny how history plays out

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

pp is where i learned of this issue . . .

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 11 years ago

and its funny how they call him paranoid and then he turns ou tto be right!!!

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Alex Jones has more hits on his sites than MSNBC.

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 11 years ago

and chris matthews was one who called him bat shit crazy for even suggesting a bill like this would even come up in congress......matthews is eating crow now

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 11 years ago

Well he is batshit crazy, but its not like crazy people are always wrong about everything all the time.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

i hope matthews is eating crow now, but i trust none of them.

the main stream media is owned by six corporations.

[-] 1 points by PeoplehaveDNA (305) 11 years ago

Yup, I was just posting about this on this website. This bill S1867, Stop Internet Piracy Act, and Protect IP Act need to be STOPPED!!! OWS should march on Capitol Hill to bring attention to all three of these unconstitutional bills. The fascist police state starts with these three bills!!!

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Stop Internet Piracy Act, and Protect IP Act need to be STOPPED!!!

True - the fascist police state BOLDLY advances with these three bills !

[-] 1 points by downsouth (14) 11 years ago

exactly. People have no clue what can happen and how much power is given to politicians with this legislation. Its so unconstitutional. I mean even bringing something like this up in congress should get you tried for treason. Unreal. I mean every week I think well we seen it all. and then BAM!! some new law that makes my mouth drop in aw. They are not hiding there agenda anymore. They are rushing out of desperation. this is where we seperate the men from boys.

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 11 years ago

They did it to Arab-Americans after 9/11. There was no reasonable reason to do that except paranoia. The paranoids that you see posting on the forums aren't the only paranoid ones. The gov is guilty of that also.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Recent approval ratings for Congress are 9%.

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 11 years ago

What does that have to do with my post?

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Congress allows all of this to happen, in direct contradiction to the United States Constitution and the oath which every elected representative takes. The oath is to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

The official ideology of the U.S. state is counter-terrorism and national security. All domestic and foreign crimes are justified under the umbrella of security and defense.

[-] 1 points by Windsofchange (1044) 11 years ago

Everyone call you congress men/women early on Monday as this horrible, horrible bill could pass on Monday.

These senators who drafted this bill and had it passed through a closed-door committee rather than a hearing and their supporters are traitors to this country and have no respect for the U.S. Constitution. We should demand their resignation at the very least.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

I telephoned my Senators this morning and several of my friends did as well.


[-] 1 points by downsouth (14) 11 years ago

Did you read what i posted from that sorry excuse of a congressman named David Vitter. His response is like thank you but I am doing what the special interests paid for.

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 11 years ago

Got something similar from Gillibrand over SOPA/PIPA: Thanks for the e-mail, but I'm gonna cosponsor the bill no matter what. Sent her a particularly nasty e-mail in reply and let it go. I'm thinking we challenge Gillibrand in the Democratic primaries and Vitter in the general election in 2012. Who's with me?

[-] 1 points by Windsofchange (1044) 11 years ago

It figures. That says it all. They don't represent the American people and it shows.

[-] 1 points by downsouth (14) 11 years ago

they don't and its why we need to clean house. Only issue is when you clean house you dont know what you are getting in return.....sigh

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Telephone and contact your friends about S 1867

[-] 1 points by Windsofchange (1044) 11 years ago


[-] 1 points by billyjoe3 (6) 11 years ago

Watch Banned Episode: Jesse Ventura’s “Police State”


the night the “Police State” episode aired, Michael Braverman Executive producer of the show said “that he had information that there were powerful forces that wanted the show off the air”. You can hear additional comments from Mr. Braverman in the following video:

Police State Episode Info Erased from TruTV’s Website (Nov 25, 2010) http://www.trutv.com/shows/conspiracy_theory/episodes/index.html

Police State and Alex Jones Videos Erased on TRuTV’s Website (Nov 25, 2010) http://www.trutv.com/video/conspiracy-theory/index.html

Police State Episode was blocked out of TruTV Programming Code (Nov 26, 2010) http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=193209.0

Police State Episode was Not Re-Aired on Nov.19th as previously scheduled. (Popeye from FedJack.com documents this on his Youtube channel) “Is Jesse Ventura’s Police State Episode being censored

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago


I copied the links but the first link seems to be for a viewer - not the episode "Police State."

[-] 1 points by billyjoe3 (6) 11 years ago

usually windows video player won't those types of videos- that free player will play anything-

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

but, is there a file to watch - if i download the viewer ?

[-] 0 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

thank you, will watch. Jesse Ventura - the best -

Naomi Wolf wrote a very good article, "The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy," published Nov 25, in the UK - not here.

"The violent police assaults across the US are no coincidence. Occupy has touched the third rail of our political class's venality."


[-] 1 points by billyjoe3 (6) 11 years ago

The Americans, can't understand that they do not still have freedom of the press- their media is controlled by the government. Its similar to when Hitler came to power. The American people have allowed their government to conquer the world, for greed, and now when their government is coming after them, they refuse to do anything.

[-] 1 points by downsouth (14) 11 years ago

Did this a week ago and got a letter from my congressman saying tough titty. Here is his office response to me(you can see who this is-direct copy from my email minus my name and email)....

----- Forwarded Message ----- From: "David_Vitter@vitter.senate.gov" David_Vitter@vitter.senate.gov

Subject: Responding to your message


Thank you for contacting me in opposition to provisions related to detainees in the National Defense Authorization Act . I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

As you may know, Congress is considering including legislation in the defense bill for fiscal year 2012 that would affect the detention authority Congress granted the President following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Many persons captured during subsequent operations in Afghanistan and elsewhere have been placed in preventive detention to stop them from participating in hostilities or terrorist activities. A few have been tried by military commission for crimes associated with those hostilities, while many others have been tried for terrorism-related crimes in civilian court.

I have great concerns about the possibility of allowing into the United States individuals who were and will likely remain a threat to our homeland security. As a member of the U.S. Senate's Armed Services Committee, I am committed to enhancing our national security capabilities. The safety and security of our country depends upon allowing the military to pursue all options to maintain our security, including detaining and interrogating terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. While we disagree on this issue, rest assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as the U.S. Senate considers legislation affecting the Guantanamo detainees.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about other issues important to you.

[-] 2 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Thank you for writing and sharing the response . . . but we cannot allow this !

We really must hammer them with telephone calls ! It is hard to believe that no one has taken on this cause with an organized PUSH BACK CAMPAIGN !

The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing

[-] 1 points by Windsofchange (1044) 11 years ago

Yes, tomorrow morning do just that. This bill could pass tomorrow. I will really lose it if it does. I tried my best to get the word out on this forum and others online, now it is us to the American people--they can't sit on this. TAKE ACTION EVERYONE.

[-] 1 points by downsouth (14) 11 years ago

I have been calling them and emailing them. They know me by name. I am doing everything I can to make sure my voice is heard. I did read where Obama may veto it. As i don't believe anything out of anyone's mouth thats a politic. Hopefully it doesn't pass but like I said, I have been doing everything I can to let my voice be heard and stop it. Hard to stop it when this fool i have as a congressman is part of the problem. I wont give up though. Keep fighting there special agenda.

[-] 1 points by downsouth (14) 11 years ago

Would like to add that his office beats around the bush. They use the typical 9-11 bullshit and avoid the small piece of legislation that allows them to infringe on US citizens rights. So sick of this shit.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

Thanks for all you are doing . . Keep up the good work !

We should be contacting the White House, since Obama may veto.

[-] 1 points by downsouth (14) 11 years ago

I have been..lol. Hopefully we don't see this passed. Just everybody do what you can. Most poeple have no clue how this can and will effect them. A true piece of legislation that allows a Police state. People really have no clue whats at stake here. This means they can round up OWS without any reason or any other peaceful protest. Keep you jailed forever if they like.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

it has received no coverage by the media .

word of mouth is our friend !

[-] 0 points by Tinhorn (285) 11 years ago

At least he was man enough to tell you that he disagreed with you and didn't try to sugar coat it to tell you what you wanted to hear. I have to give him credit for that.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 11 years ago

This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.