Anonymous and the Occupy Movement have joined forces to defeat congressional supporters of SOPA, PIPA, and NDAA this November.
Anonymous announced today a joint campaign with the Occupy Wall Street Movement called “Our Polls,” which targets members of Congress who supported a variety of bills these groups find particularly offensive. Namely: the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The groups call on voters to remove all those who supported these bills from office on November 6, election day.
The primary message of the Our Polls effort is that Washington is corrupted by money, and that the politicians who were elected to represent us worry more about the thickness of their wallets than the lives of their constituents.
On Monday 13, February 2012, at noon, in Medford Oregon, a demonstration will take place at Vogel Plaza against the passing of the NDAA. What is unusual about this action, and could be an indication of similar actions on other issues, is that it is uniting American citizens from across the political spectrum. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which was signed into law on December 31, 2011, is an assault on freedom and civil liberties.
Protesting will be members of Occupy Wall Street, Libertarians and the Tea Party Activists.
Joe Rogan speaking out about Obama signing the NDAA into law
Obama signed this into law. Obama specifically requested that NDAA include US Citizens. This has not gotten enough attention.
Our President blames the Senate for tagging NDAA in with the military appropriations bill, when it was his office that requested the provision! What a bunch of baloney. In the Republic Plato warns that Democracy can devolve into a tyranny, and it seems to me that Obama is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the nefarious forces within our Govt.
Whoever votes for Obama in the upcoming elections hates America.
This afternoon, Obama signed the controversial Defense authorization bill, despite his reservations about provisions related to the treatment of terrorism suspects. The National Journal reports:
President Obama signed on Saturday the defense authorization bill, formally ending weeks of heated debate in Congress and intense lobbying by the administration to strip controversial provisions requiring the transfer of some terror suspects to military custody.
“I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists,” Obama said in a statement accompanying his signature.
Eight people affiliated with Occupy Des Moines were arrested this afternoon at the Iowa Democratic Party headquarters in Des Moines.
The eight, whose hands were zip-tied behind their backs, were placed in a police wagon and transported to the Des Moines police station, where they were cited and released.
Each was to be charged with criminal trespassing, which is a misdemeanor. They did not resist arrest and were escorted out of the headquarters at 5661 Fleur Drive without incident.
Twelve people had walked into the headquarters late this morning. They were there to demand that President Obama veto the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the omnibus spending bill. Police told the protesters that they could either leave the headquarters or be arrested.
By 2:15 p.m., all protesters had left the building.
Norm Sterzenbach, executive director of the Iowa Democratic Party, said the protesters are continuing to deliver the same message they were brought earlier today to the Obama campaign office north of downtown Des Moines.
Demonstrators had been at Obama’s campaign headquarters much of the weekend. However, the office was closed and protesters were not able to talk personally with anyone about their concerns. Demonstrators decided to move the Obama campaign office occupation at approximately 11 to the Democratic party headquarters.
“They don’t want to be hear to listen to us, we decided to go to the state headquarters and make them listen to us,” Occupy Wall Street member Daniel Bragg said.
This year’s National Defense Authorization Act passed quickly through the Senate and as expected President Obama signed the bill. 86 Senators in a bipartisan move, signed off on this controversial bill, which opens the door to invasive acts against Americans. Almost everyone has felt the effect of Anonymous’ presence online and off and now, the 86 Senators will feel their ubiquitous presence as well.
The collective activist group just released a massive dump of information, which begins with, ”Robert J. Portman is a Republican Senator from the state of Ohio. He has made himself a target as an advocate of the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), but we are truly disturbed by the ludicrous $272,853 he received from special interest groups supporting the NDAA bill that authorizes the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. Robert J. Portman, we plan to make an example of you.”
This year’s National Defense Authorization Act has just passed through the Senate. The only obstacle is President Obama and historically he caves into vocal opposition, and looking at the lengthy list of Senators voting Yea, this abomination this could very well pass.
The 13 Senators that voted Nay on this year’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), with 86 voting Yea:
Please Sign The Petition To Have The President Veto The National Defense Authorization Act
The National Defense Authorization Act, which Occupy Wall Street is strongly against, allows American Citizens to be detained & held by the US Government/Military indefinitely, without judge, jury, or trial. It also allocates an additional $650 billion in defense spending, that we don’t need to be spending or have in the first place.
This act has been passed by Congress and will be in front of Obama to sign into law shortly. He has already stated that he has no intention to veto it.
Leading figures on the right and the left joined forces Thursday to condemn President Barack Obama for going back on his pledge not to veto a security bill that would allow for the indefinite detention of American terror suspects without trial.
Anyone who the administration believes is “part of or substantially supported al-Qaida, the Taliban or associated forces,” could face lifetime detention at Guantanamo Bay, without appeal or even a lawyer under the provision.
The House passed the bill on Wednesday, 283-136, and the Senate followed suit, 86-13, Thursday afternoon.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky led the attack on the new law.
“Detaining citizens without trial is not American,” he said, adding that passage of the law would signify that the terrorists have won.
“We’re talking about American citizens who can be taken from the United States and sent to a camp at Guantanamo Bay and held indefinitely,” Paul added. “It puts every American at risk, and Occupy Wall Street agrees with this.
“What security does this indefinite detention of Americans give us?” Paul asked. “The first and flawed premise, both here and in the badly named Patriot Act, is that our pre-9/11 police powers were insufficient to stop terrorism. This is simply not borne out by the facts.”
Condemnation of President Obama is intense, and growing, as a result of his announced intent to sign into law the indefinite detention bill embedded in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). These denunciations come not only from the nation’s leading civil liberties and human rights groups, but also from the pro-Obama New York Times Editorial Page, which today has a scathing Editorial describing Obama’s stance as “a complete political cave-in, one that reinforces the impression of a fumbling presidency” and lamenting that “the bill has so many other objectionable aspects that we can’t go into them all,” as well as from vocal Obama supporters such as Andrew Sullivan, who wrote yesterday that this episode is “another sign that his campaign pledge to be vigilant about civil liberties in the war on terror was a lie.” In damage control mode, White-House-allied groupsare now trying to ride to the rescue with attacks on the ACLU and dismissive belittling of the bill’s dangers.
For that reason, and Occupy Wall Street agrees, it is very worthwhile to briefly examine — and debunk — the three principal myths being spread by supporters of this bill, and to do so very simply: by citing the relevant provisions of the bill, as well as the relevant passages of the original 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF), so that everyone can judge for themselves what this bill actually includes (this is all above and beyond the evidence I assembled in writing about this bill yesterday):
Myth # 1: This bill does not codify indefinite detention
Section 1021 of the NDAA governs, as its title says, “Authority of the Armed Forces to Detain Covered Persons Pursuant to the AUMF.” The first provision — section (a) — explicitly “affirms that the authority of the President” under the AUMF ”includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons.” The next section, (b), defines “covered persons” — i.e., those who can be detained by the U.S. military — as “a person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners.” With regard to those “covered individuals,” this is the power vested in the President by the next section, (c):
In his inaugural address, President Obama called on us to “reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.” We agree. Now, to protect both, he must veto the National Defense Authorization Act that Congress is expected to pass this week.
This budget bill — which can be vetoed without cutting financing for our troops — is both misguided and unnecessary: the president already has the power and flexibility to effectively fight terrorism.
One provision would authorize the military to indefinitely detain without charge people suspected of involvement with terrorism, including United States citizens apprehended on American soil. Due process would be a thing of the past. Some claim that this provision would merely codify existing practice. Current law empowers the military to detain people caught on the battlefield, but this provision would expand the battlefield to include the United States — and hand Osama bin Laden an unearned victory long after his well-earned demise.
A second provision would mandate military custody for most terrorism suspects. It would force on the military responsibilities it hasn’t sought. This would violate not only the spirit of the post-Reconstruction act limiting the use of the armed forces for domestic law enforcement but also our trust with service members, who enlist believing that they will never be asked to turn their weapons on fellow Americans. It would sideline the work of the F.B.I. and local law enforcement agencies in domestic counterterrorism. These agencies have collected invaluable intelligence because the criminal justice system — unlike indefinite military detention — gives suspects incentives to cooperate.
White House Lifts Veto Threat of Defense Authorization Bill.
This bill of “detaining Americans indefinitely will no trial, judge or jury” will pass. Obama will not veto it. This will actually happen. Wow.
President Obama has dropped his threat to veto the 2012 defense authorization bill after his advisers concluded that revised provisions about detainees would not harm national security.
The new “language does not challenge or constrain the president’s ability to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists, and protect the American people,” Press Secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.
The House is poised to pass the bill on Wednesday, despite controversial provisions requiring military detention for some terrorism suspects.
Flood the whitehouse comment line 202-456-1111! Be proactive!
Outside of the independent media, opposition to NDAA has remained almost nonexistent, with the mainstream neglecting to discuss the colossal implications the bill would have if it is signed into law. Speaking to radio host Alex Jones on Tuesday, however, Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul finally became one of the first main figures to attack the act.
“This is a giant step – this should be the biggest news going right now – literally legalizing martial law,” said Paul. The congressman from Texas also appeared flabbergasted that the bill managed to escape discussion in any of the recent GOP debates, despite its provisions being detrimental to the US Constitution and the freedom of every man, woman and child in America.
“This is big,” continued Paul, adding “This step where they can literally arrest American citizens and put them away without trial….is arrogant and bold and dangerous.”
The bill could be on the desk of Barack Obama as early as Wednesday of this week.
We now know, for those that have been holding out in “hope” that Obama will veto the 1031 Indefinite Detainment Bill (NDAA) against holding U.S. Citizens indefinitely without rights to a trial or lawyer or charges… it was Obama who required the bill have the language ‘U.S. Citizens being held without rights’ included in the bill! This bill will pass if it goes in front of Obama for his signature.
Contact your State Representative: http://writerep.house.gov/writerep/
In your correspondence with your Representative, please mention the following facts. Too many journalists are still confused on these points — please let them know too:
The bill passed by Congress absolutely DOES NOT exempt citizens
Section 1031 reads, “A covered person under this section” includes “any person who has committed a belligerent act”.
The Feinstein Amendment 1031(e) is dangerously misleading
Don’t be fooled! In the text of 1031(e), “Nothing in this section shall be construed…”, the only word that matters is “construed” — the Supreme Court are the only ones with the power to construe the law. The Feinstein Amendment 1031(e) permits citizens to be imprisoned without evidence or a trial forever, if the Supreme Court does not EXPLICITLY repeal 1031.
Confusingly, Obama previously threatened a veto for 1032, but NOT 1031
1032 does NOT concern imprisoning citizens without a trial. He has never suggested using a veto to stop Section 1031 citizen imprisonment. In fact, Section 1031 citizen imprisonment without trial was requested by the Obama administration. See the video proof here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLiKvSz_wX8
As soon as you sign, the President and Congress will be sent your signature.
The President is about to sign a law that makes it so we can be imprisoned for life without evidence or a trial – as soon as Dec. 13. This law is called NDAA Section 1031. Some people are saying he will veto it, or that the law as written has no effect for citizens, but they are terribly mistaken. Get familiar with the facts at the bottom of this petition. This video contains proof that his administration were the ones who requested citizen imprisonment:
We have only a few days to speak up before the President approves NDAA Section 1031, permitting citizen imprisonment without evidence or a trial. Congress has already passed it overwhelmingly. They were scheduled to give it to him to sign on December 9, but they delayed giving us a small window of time to quickly alert the media and each other. We need people to know the facts listed at the bottom of this petition.