Not the end, just the end of the beginning

And that -- that brings me to the second mode of civil disobedience. There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus -- and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it -- that unless you're free the machine will be prevented from working at all!!

-- Mario Savio, Dec. 2, 1964.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/?c=r

Occupy was a GREAT way to get attention, and show our numbers. I still dont know why someone has not created a bumper sticker that says " we are the 99%" - another way to show solidarity and see our numbers, right? - However, occupy should consider moving inside the system whilst staying clean ( some of them think it can't be done - but, if it can't be done - truly all is lost ..Thom Hartmann is proff that it CAN be done. )

I suggest campaign offices. Do I think we need to run someone against Obama? maybe YES. We can pull him out if his numbers dont increase - but frankly - it appears that Obama will only do what ne MUST fo to survive, and not much more. Is he BEHIND the bill to make occupiers like enemy combatants?? IF so, then he CANT be trusted. That is overkill.

What I would like to see is a UNIFIED PARTY - or UNITY PARTY. I like ALAN GRAYSON fused with Huntsman ( a jew and a mormon, why not? ) . HUntsman seems moderate and intelligent, and he seems to care - plus the Republicans will never support him ( for that reason ) ... but i also beleive we should run politicians at ALL levels.

we now know what we stand for: it is simple too. A LEVEL ECONOMIC PLAYING FIELD. No one is saying that rich people should not enjoy the fruits of their success ( if they did not steal it ) .. BUT ..when they are ABLE to gettaxed less than poorer people - regardless of the way it is set up - ( bonuses, deferment of taxes, ) it is NOT a level playing field. It is tilted intheir direction. ( this goes for social justice too, or course) ..but really that is about it ...

that involves ONETHING - getting money out of politics - separation of dollars and state ... ( not just church and state ) ...

and frankly - as long as obama is asking for donations ... he does not stand for this

right??

joe@99buttons.com

DJ, I doubt this. Homelessness has grown substantially since Clinton tore out the social safety net (while funding corps for export our jobs). One of the first things you learn is that you have to hide the fact that you're homeless, as this is increasingly treated as a criminal offense. You can't stay on the streets or sleep in the park because you'll be arrested for loitering, vagrancy, etc. If you have children, they can be taken from you, put into "indefinite state custody," and -- because of the welfare "reform" laws approved by the public -- you no longer have the right to legally contest it. It is automatically listed as a(n assumed) "failure to adequately provide." In the US today, poverty IS regarded/treated as a punishable offense. This isn't going to change in the foreseeable future because, oddly, this generation of progressives have embraced the right-wing concept of "Our system works so perfectly that there is no legitimate excuse for being poor. If you choose to be poor, you must be treated very harshly."

Arrest McCain and Levin Now. Senate to Vote on Military Detention of Americans. http://www.opednews.com/articles/Arrest-McCain-and-Levin-No-by-Ralph-Lopez-111129-913.html Open Letter To Democratic Underground, Daily Kos, Raw Story, Op-Ed News, Talk Left, And Other Progressive Blogs

Make no mistake; this is a war against the American people perpetrated by both aisles of Congress. It appears that the Elites and Corporations are extremely worried about theOccupy Wall Street Protests and in their paranoia - expect that these protests will grow, become violent, and threaten their ability to rape and pillage the American people, even though all of the protests have been largely peaceful with violence and brutality being perpetrated by the Police - not the people.

http://www.opednews.com/Diary/Open-Letter-To-Democratic-by-William-Cormier-111128-240.html?show=votes

Why would the Oath required by law to be sworn by US officers recognize a class of criminals, "domestic enemies" of the "United States Constitution," if there were no such thing? Now Chris Anders, Legislative Counsel for the ACLU writes:

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....

Anders warns us that the worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is scheduled for a Senate vote on Wednesday, November 30.

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.

Addressing a disinformation campaign aimed at convincing people that American citizens are exempt, Anders takes strong exception and explains:

Don't be confused by anyone claiming that the indefinite detention legislation does not apply to American citizens. It does. There is an exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032 of the bill), but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1013 of the bill). So, the result is that, under the bill, the military has the power to indefinitely imprison American citizens.

Sen. Lindsey Graham put it as bluntly as it could be put on the Senate floor:

"1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland."

In an unusual closing of ranks, many conservative websites have picked up and run the ACLU Alert either verbatim or as part of their own action alerts. ConservativeByte.com in "Senate Moves To Allow Military To Arrest Americans Without Charge Or Trial" writes:

The Senate is set to vote on a bill today that would define the whole of the United States as a "battlefield" and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

Translation: this is not a liberal or conservative thing. This is an American thing.

In support of the bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said 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." Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) declared that the bill is needed because "America is part of the battlefield."

Anders in his legislative alert asks a good question: Why now?

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?

Although Obama has threatened to veto the bill over the provision, this is not the first time McCain has revealed his totalitarian, un-American impulses. Last year he was lead sponsor S. 3081 which outlined the process by which Americans may be held indefinitely, without notice of their Miranda Rights, and without ever being charged with a crime, after being arrested in their own country. Due to popular outcry, the bill never became law.

What today's action tells us is that this was not a one-off by McCain and whatever anti-Constitution gang he can round up at the moment. He will keep trying until this president or another one signs it. The ACLU is recommending people lobby their senators to support theUdall Amendment which will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a "requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power."

You mentioned sect 1031, but I didn't find it in the info you provided. Was that a typo and you meant 1032?

http://www.doeda.com/y911.html

IF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS TAKEN AWAY THEN DUMB AND SILENT WE MAY BE LED, LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER. George Washington

I spent the Thanksgiving weekend in the land of compassionate conservatives, Grand Rapids, MI where there is a church on practically every corner. Strangers will approach to ask about your connection with a "church family" and invite you to "their wonderful bible based church". This is the home of the uninformed watchers of Fox for their news and are completely unaware as to the importance of the OWS/OT movements; but, follow the Tea Party, the Republican Party, and Glenn Beck.

One family shared that they believe that the demonstrations and movement will not survive and nothing will be accomplished. That the people in the street need to find jobs. One man, repeated over and over again that, "President Obama needs one billion dollars to campaign for a second term". "And where will those campaign funds come from?", I asked. The answer, of course, is from corporations, special interests and the wealthy; with a history of "selecting" the politicians that have been placed in positions where the majority have damaged and caused our economic disaster. The name taken "Citizens United" sounds like an advocacy group for "We the People" and it was an opportunity to share information.

I believe that one key in the education of the conservatives and the changes that are harming our nation is to ask parents to think of their children and grandchildren and what their future will be if we continue to have our rights taken away.

If the economy keeps creeping along the republican trail of disparity ....... tents may be the shelter of choice for most of us.

Here is what I found in Thomas. The Udall amendment failed. I can't see the part that says citizens can be arrested. The only place addressing this is the Military Commissions Act of 2006. If that is the connection, this part may be in conflict with the ability of the President or Sec. of State to confer enemy combatant status on citizens. I will look it up. Lawyers? What is your take on this? SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined--

(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and

(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

(c) Implementation Procedures-

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.

(2) ELEMENTS- The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:

(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.

(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.

(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a)(2) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation session which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing session.

(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.

(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a)(4) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.

(d) Effective Date- This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.

SEC. 1033. REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFICATIONS RELATING TO THE TRANSFER OF DETAINEES AT UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA, TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND OTHER FOREIGN ENTITIES.

(a) Certification Required Prior to Transfer-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (d), the Secretary of Defense may not use any amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise available to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2012 to transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody or control of the individual's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity unless the Secretary submits to Congress the certification described in subsection (b) not later than 30 days before the transfer of the individual.

(2) EXCEPTION- Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by the Secretary to transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo to effectuate--

(A) an order affecting the disposition of the individual that is issued by a court or competent tribunal of the United States having lawful jurisdiction (which the Secretary shall notify Congress of promptly after issuance); or

(B) a pre-trial agreement entered in a military commission case prior to the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Certification- A certification described in this subsection is a written certification made by the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, that the government of the foreign country or the recognized leadership of the foreign entity to which the individual detained at Guantanamo is to be transferred--

(1) is not a designated state sponsor of terrorism or a designated foreign terrorist organization;

(2) maintains control over each detention facility in which the individual is to be detained if the individual is to be housed in a detention facility;

(3) is not, as of the date of the certification, facing a threat that is likely to substantially affect its ability to exercise control over the individual;

(4) has taken or agreed to take effective actions to ensure that the individual cannot take action to threaten the United States, its citizens, or its allies in the future;

(5) has taken or agreed to take such actions as the Secretary of Defense determines are necessary to ensure that the individual cannot engage or reengage in any terrorist activity; and

(6) has agreed to share with the United States any information that--

(A) is related to the individual or any associates of the individual; and

(B) could affect the security of the United States, its citizens, or its allies.

(c) Prohibition in Cases of Prior Confirmed Recidivism-

(1) PROHIBITION- Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (d), the Secretary of Defense may not use any amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense to transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody or control of the individual's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity if there is a confirmed case of any individual who was detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, at any time after September 11, 2001, who was transferred to such foreign country or entity and subsequently engaged in any terrorist activity.

(2) EXCEPTION- Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by the Secretary to transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo to effectuate--

(A) an order affecting the disposition of the individual that is issued by a court or competent tribunal of the United States having lawful jurisdiction (which the Secretary shall notify Congress of promptly after issuance); or

(B) a pre-trial agreement entered in a military commission case prior to the date of the enactment of this Act.

(d) National Security Waiver-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Defense may waive the applicability to a detainee transfer of a certification requirement specified in paragraph (4) or (5) of subsection (b) or the prohibition in subsection (c) if the Secretary, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, determines that--

(A) alternative actions will be taken to address the underlying purpose of the requirement or requirements to be waived;

(B) in the case of a waiver of paragraph (4) or (5) of subsection (b), it is not possible to certify that the risks addressed in the paragraph to be waived have been completely eliminated, but the actions to be taken under subparagraph (A) will substantially mitigate such risks with regard to the individual to be transferred;

(C) in the case of a waiver of subsection (c), the Secretary has considered any confirmed case in which an individual who was transferred to the country subsequently engaged in terrorist activity, and the actions to be taken under subparagraph (A) will substantially mitigate the risk of recidivism with regard to the individual to be transferred; and

(D) the transfer is in the national security interests of the United States.

(2) REPORTS- Whenever the Secretary makes a determination under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress, not later than 30 days before the transfer of the individual concerned, the following:

(A) A copy of the determination and the waiver concerned.

(B) A statement of the basis for the determination, including--

(i) an explanation why the transfer is in the national security interests of the United States; and

(ii) in the case of a waiver of paragraph (4) or (5) of subsection (b), an explanation why it is not possible to certify that the risks addressed in the paragraph to be waived have been completely eliminated.

(C) A summary of the alternative actions to be taken to address the underlying purpose of, and to mitigate the risks addressed in, the paragraph or subsection to be waived.

(e) Definitions- In this section:

(1) The term `appropriate committees of Congress' means--

(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and

(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

(2) The term `individual detained at Guantanamo' means any individual located at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of October 1, 2009, who--

(A) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of the Armed Forces of the United States; and

(B) is--

(i) in the custody or under the control of the Department of Defense; or

(ii) otherwise under detention at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

(3) The term `foreign terrorist organization' means any organization so designated by the Secretary of State under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189).

(f) Repeal of Superseded Authority- Section 1033 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383; 124 Stat. 4351) is repealed.

Here is a copy of a letter I just sent to our local paper the Mobile Press-Register. It was inspired in part by your blog Thom. Perhaps some of these barbarians will see themselves, but I doubt it. I hope I am not becoming too much of a cynic. ~;^}>

What have we become?

We have been going to the Wal*Mart in Foley(AL) on "Black Friday" for the last 3 or 4 years. We have always found it a pleasent, safe, civil, even enjoyable experience.
As we waited for the sale items to be unwrapped people were friendly, sociable and pleasant. When we lined up for a limited number of items the clerks handed out numbers to the people when they got to the number of items on sale they told the rest that they need not wait.
Oh, there were a few who tried to cut the lines. However when they were called on it they sheepishly returned to the end of the line.
In those past years we watched the news. We saw the craziness and violence at other stores. In other cities. We were thankful that we didn't live in such barbaric places.
This year the picture changed entirely. They were us. We saw a young girl trampled in the rush to get a couple of video games. A handicapped man in a motorized cart was hit over the head and a few towels were snatched from his hands. There was pushing and shoving. There was rudeness, anger hostility, violence, all sorts of barbaric behavior.
Throughout the world people are taking to the streets to gain the freedom so long denied them. They are met with violence from those that rule them. People all over this country, all over the world, are peacefully occupying public spaces to demand justice and opportunity. The promise of America. They are met with violence by the very government, the very authorities that are charged with their protection.
Yet last week we saw tens of thousands of Americans commit violence against one another, hundreds of Alabamans attacked one another, for a $2 waffle iron??
Is this the new motto for America,"Shop 'til you drop, or we dropkick you?"
Economic stimulus aside - is this really the community we want to be?? Is this the nation we want to be??
Thank you for your consideration.
pulldigm@yahoo.com

Right Wingers have no use for facts. You can pretty much take anything a Republican says, flip it around completely - and there you will find the truth.

I love it when you offer these history lessons, Thom! It's infinitely fascinating to me and is so needed in our society today. Sadly, our schools no longer teach this stuff.

Thank you Thom for putting together another important piece and asking the important questions as usual. Thank you for bringing attention to the fact that people are getting violent as they try to gather the scraps that fall from the beards of the super rich.

Please help Sensible Washington improve Washington State's economy with jobs for industrial hemp. We send billions of dollars to Canada for hemp seeds every year. Let us keep that money in Washington in the hands of our farmers. Help Sensible Washington. Look for Sensible Washington on Facebook and Google Plus. Go to

http://www.sensiblewashington.org

and

http://www.sensiblewainfo.com/map

Thank you! :)