This disgusts me. Sooner or later, my public announcement of this disgust is going to place me on a list of people that are seen as dissenters, since all of our electronic communication is now being logged for posterity. That list will at some point be renamed "terrorists". At some point in the future (as a non-American), the United States would find it legally acceptable that I can be targeted by a drone and blown u…
> Sooner or later, my public announcement of this disgust is going to place me on a list of people that are seen as dissenters Are you sure? If half of the US citizenship also expresses public disgust at the same thing, there's not much use in making a list; that list may as well be the phone book.
Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
31–40 of 150 posts
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#32This disgusts me. Sooner or later, my public announcement of this disgust is going to place me on a list of people that are seen as dissenters, since all of our electronic communication is now being logged for posterity. That list will at some point be renamed "terrorists". At some point in the future (as a non-American), the United States would find it legally acceptable that I can be targeted by a drone and blown u…
> Sooner or later, my public announcement of this disgust is going to place me on a list of people that are seen as dissenters Are you sure? If half of the US citizenship also expresses public disgust at the same thing, there's not much use in making a list; that list may as well be the phone book.
Only, that's not going to happen, is it?
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#33Why is it that every leader in power seems to forget that they won't stay in that position forever? Let's take his word for it and say the power won't be abused. What of his successors? If a power exists, it will be abused. Period. It's only a matter of time. That's the whole premise behind checks and balances and due process. You don't leave power in the hands of a few, but the many.
Why should he care? He cannot run again. It would be so much better if Presidents only could serve one term, make it six years if you must, but it must be only one term. This way we don't get the unaccountable second term crap we see a lot of.
Things that come to mind are the absolute restriction to a two party system and the concentration on a leader figure, ie. the identification of the government with one person. But from my limited point of view both of those things are at the core of the US political identity, utterly entrenched.
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#34It is something so basic and fundamental that every person here has to learn it and what it means as a child. Every politician hast to have a deep understanding of why that is so fundamentally important, else he really shouldn't be entrusted with any kind of political position in any kind of republic.
It's something that is known since the antique and has been strengthened by any bad government that appeared throughout history, so how is it that such a law (or actually anti-law) is possible and not uniformly rejected in first place?
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#35Either way, what's scary about this it's that it's happening under normal conditions. At least if they could declare an emergency state, or officially declare the war against those "enemy combatants", because then you'd know that they may get some extra-judicial powers, but only temporary.
But you can imagine this will last forever, because US will never be at "more peace" than they are right now, and it's all because how they are acting abroad. So don't think these laws will ever change unless more people speak out against them and hold their Congress accountable for it.
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#36Why is it that every leader in power seems to forget that they won't stay in that position forever? Let's take his word for it and say the power won't be abused. What of his successors? If a power exists, it will be abused. Period. It's only a matter of time. That's the whole premise behind checks and balances and due process. You don't leave power in the hands of a few, but the many.
I'm building software. But who says the algorithms I develop cannot be used maliciously, just because I won't do so myself?
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trickier than that is the following: If such actions are committed on US soil, this section will not be applicable. So this is about arresting and detaining, indefinitely, someone on foreign land. Land where the US government has no jurisdiction. Am I missing something here?
No, I think that's the picture. It's already happening in those "black sites" we hear about and the sad thing is that the citizens in those countries would be up in arms about them if they were more widely known. It's the government complicity in each of those locations that allow these things to happen. I.E. Not technically detained by the U.S. but they are detained the request of U.S. officials. It's the most flagr…
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#38So Obama has right to detain Americans and, please note, foreigners indefinitely, but he says he will not use these privileges to keep Americans (only?) imprisoned indefinitely. So does it mean foreigners have no rights in America? I guess its time governments all over the world start adding US to the list of rogue countries.
Furthermore, Obama promises that he will not abuse the right, but he can't vouch for his successors; having such laws in place is just an accident waiting to happen.
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#39This disgusts me. Sooner or later, my public announcement of this disgust is going to place me on a list of people that are seen as dissenters, since all of our electronic communication is now being logged for posterity. That list will at some point be renamed "terrorists". At some point in the future (as a non-American), the United States would find it legally acceptable that I can be targeted by a drone and blown u…
> Sooner or later, my public announcement of this disgust is going to place me on a list of people that are seen as dissenters Are you sure? If half of the US citizenship also expresses public disgust at the same thing, there's not much use in making a list; that list may as well be the phone book.
As a foreigner, this list could prevent me entering the United States. Comments posted on Twitter and Facebook have been used as reasons to reject people from entering the US in recent times.
Remember that US citizens get different rules to everyone else. UN charters such as those on prisoner's of war, human rights and torture have been ripped up by the last two US administrations. It is pertinent to note that the US does it's brutality outside the US and generally away from the eyes of its own citizens. Other brutal regimes tend to fall quickly because they do that to their own.
As I see it from the outside, your country has been stolen from you without your knowledge. It is organisations like Wikileaks and people like Edward Snowden that have started to tell us all the truth. This is why they are so important, and so very very dangerous to the powers behind the throne.
Ok, tin foil hat time:
Imagine for a minute that Obama and Bush both entered
into power without nefarious aims. Imagine that you sit
in the Oval Office on day one of your presidency when
some guy in a black suit gets shown in.
He says "Good morning Mr President" and presents you
with a little black folder. You open the folder and flick
through the pages and pages of documents, reading it slowly.
You look up and say to the man, "Who are you? What do you want?".
The man gives you a cell phone and says, "You keep this phone
with you at all times. You do not question the person at the
other end. You do not speak about this to anyone else. You'll have
some wins as president if you play ball, but otherwise we own you".
"I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the President, if I had a personal e-mail,"That kind of power makes sure that politicians do their bidding. Whoever "they" are.
Ok, tin-foil hat back in the drawer...
Re: Obama wins back the right to indefinitely detain under NDAA
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sooner or later, my public announcement of this disgust is going to place me on a list of people that are seen as dissenters Are you sure? If half of the US citizenship also expresses public disgust at the same thing, there's not much use in making a list; that list may as well be the phone book.
Do you think that half the US citizenship will ever express an opinion on any specific topic at all? Or even one tenth?