Detention law blocked
According to Bloomberg, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest blocked a law that the government passed on Dec. 31st, this last, which authorized the government to use the military to detain US citizens for their subversive activity. The group who took the case to court was led by New york Times reporter, Chris Hedges, who barely a year ago was preaching to the American people that we should follow the example of the Greeks and burn our country down. From a TSO link at the time;
Here’s to the Greeks. They know what to do when corporations pillage and loot their country. They know what to do when Goldman Sachs and international bankers collude with their power elite to falsify economic data and then make billions betting that the Greek economy will collapse. They know what to do when they are told their pensions, benefits and jobs have to be cut to pay corporate banks, which screwed them in the first place. Call a general strike. Riot. Shut down the city centers. Toss the bastards out. Do not be afraid of the language of class warfare—the rich versus the poor, the oligarchs versus the citizens, the capitalists versus the proletariat. The Greeks, unlike most of us, get it.
At Bloomberg, Hedges complains that he had to change his relationships with terrorists because of the new law contained in last year’s Defense Authorization Act;
The complaint was filed Jan. 13 by a group including former New York Times reporter Christopher Hedges. The plaintiffs contend a section of the law allows for detention of citizens and permanent residents taken into custody in the U.S. on “suspicion of providing substantial support” to people engaged in hostilities against the U.S., such as al-Qaeda.
Hedges, who testified he has been a foreign news correspondent for 20 years, said he has reported on 17 groups that are on a State Department list of terrorist groups. Hedges testified that after the law was passed, he changed his dealings with groups he had reported on, Forrest said.
Oh, you mean a guy who, last year was advocating for a violent upheaval in the US and had 20 years of relationships with 17 groups on the terrorist list is worried he might be detained by the folks who are fighting against his friends? I wonder why.
While I don’t necessarily agree with the law, I also don’t want my interests represented by this particular bag of steaming feces. Thanks to TSO for the link.
Category: Shitbags, Terror War
There’s a saying about “a guilty conscience needs no accusation.”
If Hedges is that distressed about the possibility of the military tagging him concerning his associations with terrorists, maybe he needs to go take a hard look in a mirror.
For whatever it’s worth…I think it’s a bad law. Our law enforcement arrests/detains citizens. The military shouldn’t be involved in it.
What does what he said a year ago have to do with whether this particular law is valid or not? Crude attempt to divert attention and smear the messenger. Stick to the subject.
Joe, I seriously doubt even you believe the bullshit you wrote in comment 2 above.
Hedges was openly advocating violence in the streets – which is unlawful. Combine that with his known associations with terrorist groups, and even Stevie Wonder or the late Ray Charles and Helen Keller could see the connection.
Like Pinto Nag, I have concerns regarding the law in question. But damn, Joe – don’t piss on our collective leg and try and tell us it’s raining. At least come up with bullshit that doesn’t insult the intellect.
Joe telling someone to stick to the message?
Stop. Hurt. Sides. Laughing.
Do you want to talk about what Chris Hedges said a year ago, or the law in question. Simple enoung….
What Hedges said a year ago – coupled with his known association with terrorist groups – makes him a potential target of the law in question. He’s conceded as much by (1) filing his lawsuit, and (2) changing his behavior. So by discussing his past statements, we are discussing matters relevant to the law in question.
Try again. Maybe your next attempt to say something relevant won’t be so lame.
Hondo, having watched Joey bounce from wall to wall, obfuscate, lie and generally make an ass of himself, I don’t think Joey has any idea what “relevant” means.
Well, that would depend…
Sometimes he does. Sometimes he doesn’t. To consistently obfuscate, lie and generally make an ass of himself he must at least part of the time correctly identify the point so that he can turn away from it.
OWB, only when Joey can get someone to point out the relevant to him. Other wise he’s just lost. Oh wait……..
This law had some serious erosion against our system of due process, and they manner in which we define terrorism.
This was a good ruling.
Not a big fan of the law, but douches like this asshat do need to be watched legally.
Joe in the words of one of your idols Bill Maher “did someone go slap the dick out of your ass?” what are you doing here today?
The law was BS and I’m glad someone had sense enough to say so and block it. As for Hedges, I can’t claim knowledge about any association he might have with “terrorist” groups but I can say I agree with his thought that there needs to be a little upheavel in the streets. The Occutards could use a little lesson in what revolution means. If people started kicking down doors, swinging fists, and calling down judgement of all that holy upon the “rulers” of this nation, a little change might be seen. How does that saying go? “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”? Instead we have college kooks who hold up signs because they’re afraid of being tossed in the pen where they won’t be able to update their FB and Twitter statuses.
Jane, we also have the college “students” who want someone, anyone but themselves, to pay for their college. And give them jobs where they can start out at $70K or $80K a year, while they sip lattes and update their FB and Twitter statuses.
UpNorth, yes, and they usually are the same ones holding the signs.