Hedges writes: "I know the consequences of granting sweeping and unrestricted policing power to the armed forces of any nation. And while my battle may be quixotic, it is one that has to be fought if we are to have any hope of pulling this country back from corporate fascism."
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and Truthdig columnist Chris Hedges speaking at the White House, 12/16/10. (photo: Independent Video/Truthdig)
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Are we to believe that Obama, a professor of Constitutional law, is naive enough to mean that, though he does not "intend" to use this knife on the backs of people who OPPOSE military and economic terrorism against our own people, he DOES want it on the books -- just in case? Mr. Panetta, of course, is just another patty-cake partner, obeying his master's voice.
Yes, Mr. Hedges, SUE, and thank you. Sad fact that it is ONLY through civil court that justice is sometimes a winner, in the U.S.A. Of course, it's then always about money -- when the real remedy ought to be Jail.
Of course, once someone is disappeared, how can they sue? And, if I am correct; then the law becomes bullet proof.
Also, the law functions on less evidence against a so-called terrorist. Since little or no evidence beyond rumor and innuendo is less than Chris Hedge's assertions.
Catch 22. Heads the oligarchy wins, tails you lose everything.
I hope they picked the right judge to at least get the case up 1 step of the ladder.
I'm glad he mentioned the Central American wars. Many of us PROUDLY gave material and moral support to grassroots organizations who were resisting US-sponsored terrorism in those years. Many people still do the same with the Zapatistas in Mexico. This bill is a blank check to squash dissent; it is clearly unconstitutiona l, as any honest judge will have to recognize.
I hope you are right and I am wrong. All I can say is that is real hard not to be cynical and optimistic at the same time.
Whether you (we!!!!) get any traction out of it or not it is still the right thing to do.
In my opinion, Israel is a rogue terrorist state with it's own nuclear arsenal -so why not them (don't bother to reply, we all know why!)?
And ol' Henery Kiss-my-ring for all kinds of devastating associations in so many countries.
If this is carried through to it's stupidly Hell-bent coda, a deuce of a lot of neocons would be "Disappearing" before any of us, or the author IF a just conclusion were the desired end result of this insult to anyone who truly values freedom in the "Land of the Free" (If you own the means to bestow it).
And that's just a teaser list.
Of course a just conclusion is the last thing this intended to provide.
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer" is gettin' closer folks!
Thanks C.H. for a courageous if perhaps futile stand.
Though the 'Rule of Law' is likely dead (or they wouldn't have tried such NDAA/Patriot Act/HSA horrors to begin with), it is important to go through this process anyway, 'contaminated' as it likely is. (lest 'They' think everyone is Entirely Asleep)
It certainly appears 'They'...have not only Obama-in-Pocket, but the (majority of) Congress, the Major Media and the (Supreme) Court as well.
Watch your Back!
HOW do we do this?
We do, indeed live in perilous times, but it is up to us to rise to the challenge before us. It is a challenge of mythic proportion, because it calls into question our rights- and responsibilitie s-as a nation established by men who sought to change the world in favor of justice.
MLK did remind us that "the moral arc of the universe is long... but it bends toward justice." In that, at least, there is hope. But hope is limited, unless backed up by courageous action as demonstrated by people such as Mr. Chris Hedges. The price of freedom is, indeed, eternal vigilance.
Who among us ever thought we'd see the day when the US military could be used against our own people?
It's a total outrage and deserving of the lawsuit!
And shame on Obama for his failure to veto this fascist bill just to appease the screaming neocons!
'This demented “war on terror” is as undefined and vague as such a conflict is in any totalitarian state.'
The trend in this country toward a military police state is at once pointless, wasteful, and dangerous for Americans. Yes, a lawsuit is in order!
Oligarchy is the cause. As far as I know, (having been a child during Hitler's years of the Holocaust and the years of the heroic president FDR, Chris Hedges is the first to take action in addressing the truth.
The House has refused to pass the Glass-Steagall Act, which is the first and necessary step in saving the economy of the nation. the democrats have stood by Obama, who would veto the rescue of the nation's economy. The courage of Chris Hedges is the gift of clarity and courage in our times. We are the people of these times, creating the world that our children and grandchildren will inherit.
You sound like a true and determined lefty and progressive as I hope I can be proudly identified.
"Just watching PBS and listening to NPR is to be bathed in the studied impotence of yesteryear's Sweet Liberals:"[Quote].
Absolutely!
All that PBS and NPR are good for now is "Car Talk"! I used to contribute a little to them when Bill Moyers was a programmer but when they dissed him and kept that yuppie-dolt-brat Fucker (oops -Tucker) Carlson, I dropped 'em like a hot brick.
They are even worse in some ways that FOX 'cause at least you know where that lot are comin' from and goin'.
They are just part of the owner-media since Michael Powell's time and "Ah fart in their general direction"! I wouldn't miss 'em one bit. Even their more supposedly entertaining stuff is so-o-o bourgeois dahlin' that it makes me wanna throw a ripe banana at them! Noam Chomsky (jokingly) once threatened to sue them for making him mad during his commute from M.I.T. Give what you used to give them to RSN and y'r local community radio!
Thanks for the comment on that particular sub-ject.
Obama's new NDAA is the legal equivalent of Bush's "you are either with us or with the terrorists." It is quite possible to be with neither one, or to recognize that the US is wrong to be occupying and regime changing nations and so support the people who are just defending their own nation from invaders. I certainly don't support the Taliban's political aims, but they have a greater right to decide what happens in their nation than Obama and the Pentagon do. I believe in "political self-determination," as I think most people do. That puts me and most people on the side of the Taliban. People have a right to choose their own government. The Taliban is a hell of a lot better than the Northern Alliance and war/drug lords that the US set up in Afghanistan after the Russians left. Lots of people in the US support Palestinians -- both PLO and Hamas -- over the Israelis. So does international law. And yet the US regime says Hamas is a terrorist organization and the PLO used to be a terrorist organization.
The Washington regime can now use this law to lock up and disappear anyone it chooses.
It's obvious this was done b/c 1% which includes the so-called representatives of the American people are terrified b/c they know worse is coming.
No different than what the Third Reich did in Germany. Hitler clones are running this country which includes both Democrats and Republicans.
People who are just determined to dislike, mistrust and criticize every single thing President Obama does, of course will assume the worse. That he has some nefarious plot to sell them out to the evil forces of the world, etc.
I believe his back was up against the wall with this. Congress was going to pass it, with or without him. He agreed to sign it in return for planting legal bombs in it that I feel certain will cause it to be struck down in court.
The House of Representatives voted to pass the NDAA 2012 with 283 (65%) voting yes and 136 (31%) voting no. 14 (3%) didn't vote.
The Senate voted to pass it with 86 (86%) voting yes and 13 (13%) voting no. 1 (1%) Senator did not vote.
The veto of this bill, which primarily funds the entire Armed Forces, would cause a delay, during which troops in Afghanistan would not be paid, jets would be grounded for lack of fuel, the Pentagon couldn't pay its heating bill and thousands of shipbuilders and other workers employed by contractors with the military would be laid off. He doesn't have line item veto power so he couldn't just veto the part he didn't like.
President Obama would have begun his reelection year with Republicans blaming him for "not paying our brave combat soldiers," killing jobs, and being weak on defense. He knew he was going to catch hell for this decision, but he made a difficult choice. That's why he made the signing statement. What other reason would he do that? The wording of it was part of the legal sabotage he placed in it to help assure that the courts would overturn it.
Be comforted: there IS some hope in this direction but at the state-by-state level, which has already started by being overturned in Montana (a pretty conservative place) and is under challenge in many others. I was recently at a Town Hall meeting with our junior senator from Oregon, Jeff Merkely, who spoke at some length about this and is working with his senior Ron Wyden (they both voted against it), to bring it to review and vote here, so in increments across the nation, we can take it down whilst concurrently showing that "parcel o' rogues" in the Supreme Court, that they are NOT all-powerful. Let's put our energies into this -we are not alone if we act together.
RSS feed for comments to this post.