Senators define America as battlefield, look to give military arrest powers

Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They Define as Being Right Outside Your Window

While nearly all Americans head to family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, the Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.

Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians 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. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. 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.

The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?

The answer on why now is nothing more than election season politics. The White House, the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney General have all said that the indefinite detention provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act are harmful and counterproductive. The White House has even threatened a veto. But Senate politics has propelled this bad legislation to the Senate floor.

But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.

In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in.

In response to proponents of the indefinite detention legislation who contend that the bill “applies to American citizens and designates the world as the battlefield,” and that the “heart of the issue is whether or not the United States is part of the battlefield,” Sen. Udall disagrees, and says that we can win this fight without worldwide war and worldwide indefinite detention.

The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown. That is an extreme position that will forever change our country.

Now is the time to stop this bad idea. Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being

Happy Thanksgiving to all

Here in South Carolina it’s a beautiful day, only about 50 degrees right now but sunny, supposed to be in the mid 60’s later on.

Since Mr. G. is away for this Thanksgiving that leaves me to fend for myself, so my “fending” will consist of going to my daughter’s for dinner.  I just love that I’m at the age,  strike that, that my daughter is at the age where she gets to do all the heavy work and all I have to do is show up with fork and knife in hand and eat.

Hope you all have a Happy Thanksgiving and remember what you’re thankful for.

 

The Source of Food Is None of Your Business, Says WTO


20 November 2011

http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/201…ness-says-wto/

WTO No!Do you want to know what country produced the food you eat? Too bad, says the World Trade Organization (WTO). That’s a barrier to free trade, so you don’t get to know.

The US instituted a labeling law requiring that all foods’ country of origin be on the label; it was part of the 2008 Farm Bill. Canada and Mexico complained to the WTO, saying that it would discourage food imports. It took three years, but the WTO decided that labeling food with its country of origin is a “technical barrier to trade”. In 1979, the US signed a treaty that includes prevention of technical barriers to trade. Of course, that term was not fully defined. It was up to the WTO to say just what it means. And they’ve done just that in regard to food—though for some inexplicable reason, meat is not included. Therefore, country of origin labeling can continue with meat.

But if you’d like to know that the honey on a supermarket shelf did not come from China— where much of it is produced by badly abused bees, is often contaminated with lead, may contain an antibiotic, and sometimes doesn’t even contain any honey—well, that’s just too bad. You don’t have a right to know.

Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) is not cool to the WTO. You see, COOL is a TBT, a technical barrier to trade. The United States of America, along with virtually all other nations of the world, has signed treaties with the WTO that give it authority over matters of trade—authority to say what is and is not legal inside countries if the issue affects trade. At the moment, this ruling affects only the US, but it obviously will not be limited to it.

Nearly every nation of the world has handed over its sovereignty to the WTO. Click here to see a world map showing the nations that do and don’t belong to the WTO.

Here’s what the WTO says to justify the concept of TBT:

Technical regulations and product standards may vary from country to country. Having many different regulations and standards makes life difficult for producers and exporters. If regulations are set arbitrarily, they could be used as an excuse for protectionism.

No matter how this turkey is dressed, the real purpose is to make the world safe for multinational corporations. Multinational corporations now have control over virtually every aspect of our lives by promoting and instituting treaties that are implemented via the WTO and the United Nations. Though the lingo of health and fairness is used to sell these regulations, the reality is that neither has anything to do with it. It’s all about making it easy for multinational corporations to cram their crap down our throats.

Most food is now produced or distributed through multinational corporations. Because of regulations being brought into effect now at the behest of multinational corporations through their agents, the WTO and UN, along with the governments of nations that are now wholly owned by corporate money, our right even to know what’s in our food or where it comes from has been destroyed.