Press "Enter" to skip to content

Glenn Greenwald takes apart the indefinite detention bill

The wonderful Glenn Greenwald gives a thorough fisking to the most evil portions of the National Defense Disappearance Authorization Act.

Useful info if you run into one of those conservatives or Obama supporters (and isn’t that a telling combo?) who are trying to claim the bill isn’t as horrible as we think.


  1. Kent McManigal
    Kent McManigal December 20, 2011 9:52 pm

    Unfortunately I can already hear the conservatives I know saying “If you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.” Because they are so utterly convinced that,

    a) there really are all sorts of “those people” out there waiting to kill us all because they “hate us for our freedom” (then shouldn’t they love us now?), and

    b) that god will never allow anything like that to happen here (as long as the US government supports the Israel government, anyway).

    I do expect I’d be targeted long before any of them, but that doesn’t mean they are safe.

  2. EN
    EN December 21, 2011 8:33 am

    Anyone who can’t see the danger in this deserves to fall under it’s provisions… Unfortunately the assholes always want to drag me along with them. The promise of the multicult is that we shall all stand together, strong in our stupidity, united in our own destruction!

  3. Steve Harris
    Steve Harris December 21, 2011 9:38 am

    As Kent points out the argument to justify a police state is that you don’t have to worry if you’ve done nothing wrong. Of course the definition of ‘wrong’ is moving. The constitution might be an imperfect instrument of liberty but it had some solid protections. I’d always hoped the 14th amendment would be expanded to protect people but it is now dead. I never had any great expectations of Obama but he is really depressing. I guess it takes a constitutional lawyer to really know how to kill the constitution.

    Your previous discussion of that Swedish article about the 4 boxes applies here. The ballot box is already meaningless. Choosing candidates is like getting to choose which cancer you’ll get. The soap box will be going away as more and more speech is defined as aiding terrorists. The inconvenient jury box is now being taking away. Jurors might be tempted to nullify overly oppressive laws but now someone can just be disappeared.


  4. Matt, another
    Matt, another December 21, 2011 11:25 am

    If a proper, legal, constitutional delcaration of war, by Congress had be accomplished this legislation would not be neccessary. If a legal state of war had been declared, then the president could just suspend Haebus Corpus, according to precedent set by one A. Lincoln and constitutional wording.

    Lincoln used that suspension to imprison and oppress any important northerner that dared speak out agains the civil war and it’s lack of constitutionality. He imprisoned, or threatened to imprison, publishers, reporters, judges etc that disagreed with him. IIRC there might of even been one or two representatives that were imprisoned, or threatened with such if they did not go along with him.

    The congress and Obama is just keeping a fine political tradition alive.

    Obama lied, Americans, libyans, egyptians, syrians, jordanians, pakistanis and Afghans died.

  5. Desertrat
    Desertrat December 21, 2011 11:55 am

    Well, I wouldn’t necessarily have called Jesse Helms a communist, but he seemed pretty darned liberal to me. 🙂

    This NDAA is anti-liberty, building on all the other anti-liberty garbage with which we’ve been inundated since Nixon declared the War on Some Drugs. The police-state aspect of our laws has merely been increased during this century. Nothing new. It’s a matter of degree, not of kind.

    But it’s certainly not small-c conservative in any way, shape or form. It’s purely statist–as is the majority of all elected officials at all levels of government.

Leave a Reply