Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity breeds austerity and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

Buck McKeon, Chairman of the Armed Service Committe, and Rep. Mac Thornberry offer these reassuring words to the gullible masses, who believe what their rulers tell them.

Dispelling Myths and Misinformation About NDAA

Washington – Armed Services Committee Members Reps. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Tim Griffin (R-AR) each firmly clarified and dismissed myths and misinformation about the National Defense Authorization Act and the detainee provisions in the conference report. Griffin’s radio segment and Thornberry’s thorough blog post on the matter are both included below:
“Griffin clears up the myths and misinformation of detainee language in the NDAA”

Rep. Mac Thornberry, December 15, 2011: There has been a fair amount of inaccurate information and misunderstanding about the final version of the Defense Authorization Bill (NDAA), which passed the House yesterday. The bill provides pay and benefits for our troops, buys the weapons and equipment they need, and funds research to help meet future threats. It is an important bill to pass because it helps carry out the first job of the federal government – our national defense.

Nothing like a little “support our troops” pseudo-patriotism and “national defense” fear mongering to soften you up.

There are some misunderstandings related to two provisions involving the detention of Al Qaeda terrorists. Over the past decade, the United States has detained members of Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated groups when they have been captured on the battlefield. In fact, some were released and had to be recaptured or killed because they went back to killing American soldiers. Both the Bush and Obama Administrations have detained those individuals who are members of Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated groups, and the courts have affirmed the ability to do so under the U.S. Constitution. But, the specific authorization for detention was inferred from the Authorization to Use Military Force; it was not explicitly stated in statute.

But, how does the United States know whether someone is a member of Al Qaeda, the Talaban or an associated group, if the accused is not given a trial, no witnesses, no contact with the outside world and no attorney?

Are you, the reader, a member of an “associated group”? No? The President says you are, and there is no way you will be allowed prove otherwise. Go straight to an offshore, military jail – forever.

Some people have argued that these provisions allow a President to detain American citizens within the United States indefinitely if he brands them a terrorist. That is not true.

Here are two specific provisions from the bill. Read them yourself.

SUBTITLE D. SEC. 1021. (p. 655)
(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.
SUBTITLE D. SEC. 1022. (p. 657)
(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.

If words have meaning, that is about as clear as English can get.

Some of the misunderstanding arose because there have been several versions of the bill language and previous versions did not have all of the protections that were in the final bill. Other misunderstanding came because some groups do not agree with current law. Some of them believe that all Al Qaeda terrorists should have the full constitutional rights of an American citizen, including the right to consult a lawyer, even on the battlefield.

Nonsense. A real straw man. Who has asked for a lawyer on the battlefield? Oh, yes, I forgot. Now all of America is considered a battlefield. The misleading phrase, “war on terrorism” is twisted to indicate there is an actual war in America. It’s a perfect demonstration of how familiar words can be corrupted to deceive. And again, how does one know if a person is an Al Qaeda terrorist, if no evidence is presented?

And really, do you feel it’s O.K for America to deny basic rights to someone who is not a citizen. It is all right for the President to point at a non-citizen and announce, “You are going to a secret prison, forever”? Is this what being a patriotic American means?

Those debates will continue. But the purpose of this bill was to put into statute the current legal standard agreed upon by two administrations and the courts. I’m afraid that some well-intentioned people have been agitated for reasons that just don’t exist. That does not mean that Congress should not continue to examine this issue. There may be legislative improvements that need to be made. We must protect Americans from Al Qaeda and other terrorists and at the same time protect our individual rights and liberties under the Constitution. We can do both.

Did you see anything about evidence or trial or innocent-until-proven-guilty? I didn’t. And note the little weasel word “requirement.” The requirementmay not extend to citizens, but what about the option? What specifically prevents the military from detaining a person in miliary custody? Nothing. Certainly not the Constitution, since that document now is considered obsolete by Congress, the President and the military.

Further, what is the sudden need for this? Haven’t we been told that bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda is weakened and on the run. Why, after all these years of successfully battling and weakening Al Qaeda, suddenly Congress decides to do away with Habeas Corpus?

I’ll tell you where I believe this comes from: The combination of Arab spring and #Occupy Wall Street makes the powers-that-be nervous. They want to be able to arrest all those messy “trouble-makers” – you know, those crowds of people demanding justice – without the inconvenience of probable cause, evidence and trials. Just clap those folks into a military prison, preferably somewhere out of the country, and that will solve the “war” problem.

Don’t believe the “patriotic” stories you will be fed. Don’t believe, for instance, that some innocent Muslim somehow acquired a bomb loaded plane to crash into the Pentagon, as the newspapers reported. Don’t believe this bill is for the purpose of defending America against terrorists. It’s all a sham to keep you under control. Stalin would be proud.

As I said in the previous post, it will be interesting to see how our “originalist,” right-wing, Supreme Court justices feel about it — you know, those guys claim to know what the founding fathers wanted.

Ben Franklin was a founding father. He said those who would trade security for freedom deserve neither.

My prediction: There will be lots more twisting, turning and squirming, where you will be told “up” really means “down,” and lies are truth.

1984 is here, just a couple decades late.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com


==========================================================================================================================================
No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
b>Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment + Private Consumption + Net exports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY