Constitution // Current TV

Note to Police: My Camera, My Phone, My Rights (VIDEO)

Enter a very unlikely source to teach us about our rights: actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt... more

StewSteve
added this
21 hours ago
|
0 comments

TSA Help Wanted

The latest activism video from Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, hilariously depicts... more

rodstradamus
added this
3 days ago
|
1 comment

Challenges for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition in Australia

Australia's indigenous people are still not recognised under the Australian Constitution.
The Labour party has finally moved on this issue after recommendation by an expert panel, though the conservative party The Australian Liberals have an issue with recognising indigenous Australians under the constitution and suggested only a mention in the Pre-Amble. Australia, although is a multi-party system, though the smaller parties often give preferences to one of the big two parties, the Australian Labour Party or the Australian Liberal Party. There has been some debate that if put before referendum the motion may not pass.

"HISTORIC changes to the commonwealth Constitution to acknowledge indigenous Australians face almost certain defeat unless significantly amended, after a 300-page proposal presented to Julia Gillard yesterday prompted a chorus of concerns from some indigenous leaders and legal experts.

Chief among their worries is the recommended insertion of a clause to prohibit racial discrimination, which Tony Abbott suggests may amount to a "one clause bill of rights".

The report, produced by an expert panel, recommends that the nation's guiding document be altered to remove racist sections and create a section to legislate for the "advancement" of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders and the protection of their language and culture."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/indigenous/historic-constitution-vote-over-indigenous-recognition-facing-hurdles/story-fn9hm1pm-1226248879375

Australia does not have a Bill of Rights I should point out. Free-hold land is
very rare, many of those land titles are now subject to a 99 year lease arrangement, pastoral lease, mining lease or other agreement. Given an exploration right exists, a mining company can come onto your land and make a claim then mine it, leaving the land owner entitled to nothing unless an agreement takes place. The state government receives royalties and there are some arrangements where people with land rights are entitled to payment. However a state government can decide that people are entitled to nothing in some cases and remove them if it wants. Just recently a group of Aboriginal people from Western Australia were moved from their homes and their entire town was shut down by the state government. Too expensive to maintain services was the given reason, despite the mining boom in Western Australia taking place on what was once land communally shared by indigenous peoples. Ownership and commercial exploitation of land was not part of indigenous society or traditions, instead you are part of the land, you belong to it.

Native Title claims are subject to a legally proven unbroken cultural link to the land, a rather difficult task at times when you consider that until recently Indigenous people were not recorded by the Australian Census and were subject to being forcibly moved to different locations and their children taken from them.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3412674.htm

http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/indigenous_land_rights.htmlAustralia's indigenous people are still not recognised under the Australian... more

LivingPong
added this
13 days ago
|
1 comment

The Existentialist Cowboy: How U.S. Elections May Violate the 14th Amendment

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy The ideal of 'one man, one vote'... more

Vierotchka
added this
14 days ago
|
2 comments

Crappy Birthday Citizens United

The anti-Constitutional decision, known as Citizens United, instituted by five extreme... more

TomCat1948
added this
20 days ago
|
0 comments

10 reasons the U.S. is no longer the land of the free

Immunity from judicial review Like the Bush administration, the Obama... more

JRBarilla
added this
23 days ago
|
4 comments

Voice in the Wilderness: Does CNN/Major Media Ever Read or Follow the Constitution?

Should the U.S. government censor the Internet? caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com Does... more

charkeseharvey
added this
23 days ago
|
0 comments

Santorum: Obama wants constitutional amendment to redistribute wealth

By David Edwards Friday, January 13, 2012 Republican presidential candidate Rick... more

KB723
added this
28 days ago
|
46 comments

Voice in the Wilderness: The Constitution does not apply to "Middle Class.".

God Bless American, and the Voters, that Made us all WE are today”

charkeseharvey
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

The Cordray Controversy Explained

When President Barack Obama recess appointed Richard Cordray to head the Consumer... more

TomCat1948
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

The Cordray Controversy Explained

When President Barack Obama recess appointed Richard Cordray to head the Consumer... more

TomCat1948
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

Why Don't We have Professional Jurors?

Many Asian and European nations have "professional" jurors, but not the USA... more

googygood
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

Article: Sad News: Richard Grossman Has Died (1943-2011)

A giant in the movement to dismantle corporate constitutional so-called... more

frankpatton
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

US Senators want to TORTURE & Detain US citizens: Must See Actual Video! Not shown on CSPAN

Infowars Nightly News Tuesday, December 20, 2011 The latest Infowars.com uncovered... more

im1mjrpain
added this
1 month ago
|
1 comment

Barack Obama Sinks Further Into the Civil Rights Abyss

By failing to stand against the Defense Authorization Act, Barack Obama has rubber... more

DebEquality
added this
1 month ago
|
2 comments

Need to Reset Our Government

Our political system just plain sucks. Phew, glad I got that out. Okay, seriously,... more

joeeddy
added this
1 month ago
|
1 comment

COMING SOON: AMERICANS IN GITMO

Military given go-ahead to detain US terrorist suspects without trial.

Civil rights groups dismayed as Barack Obama abandons commitment to veto new security law contained in defence bill.

Americans can be arrested on home soil and taken to Guantánamo Bay under a provision inserted into the bill that funds the US military.

Barack Obama has abandoned a commitment to veto a new security law that allows the military to indefinitely detain without trial American terrorism suspects arrested on US soil who could then be shipped to Guantánamo Bay.

Human rights groups accused the president of deserting his principles and disregarding the long-established principle that the military is not used in domestic policing. The legislation has also been strongly criticised by libertarians on the right angered at the stripping of individual rights for the duration of "a war that appears to have no end".

The law, contained in the defence authorisation bill that funds the US military, effectively extends the battlefield in the "war on terror" to the US and applies the established principle that combatants in any war are subject to military detention.

The legislation's supporters in Congress say it simply codifies existing practice, such as the indefinite detention of alleged terrorists at Guantánamo Bay. But the law's critics describe it as a draconian piece of legislation that extends the reach of detention without trial to include US citizens arrested in their own country.

"It's something so radical that it would have been considered crazy had it been pushed by the Bush administration," said Tom Malinowski of Human Rights Watch. "It establishes precisely the kind of system that the United States has consistently urged other countries not to adopt. At a time when the United States is urging Egypt, for example, to scrap its emergency law and military courts, this is not consistent."

more at link...

The title is a misnomer b/c they got plenty of FEMA Camps to send you to.
America is dead. Constitution burned. Freedoms gone.Military given go-ahead to detain US terrorist suspects without trial. Civil rights... more

rodstradamus
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

The Internet Blacklist vs. The Constitution

Both scholars concluded that the proposed law could not pass muster under the U.S.... more

worrg
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

A New Protest Movement Proposed: America 1-2-3

Instead of just protesting in the street and getting their skulls cracked by the local... more

maasanova
added this
1 month ago
|
22 comments

President Obama, vetoing the NDAA is your job!

The NDAA, Sec.1031 is the hammer coming down on the last nail of the democracy coffin. It is so egregious that any president worth their salt wouldn't even have to say they will veto it because it should be a given. When a president takes the oath of office at their inauguration they promise to protect and defend the constitution:

The oath to be taken by the president on first entering office is specified in Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

This is part of their job. It is nothing extraordinary to veto such a bill. There shouldn't even be any doubt regarding what any U.S. president's actions would be regarding it. However, in this current atmosphere of political theatre everything is used for political points, even our liberties.

Therefore, I just wanted to say that should President Obama veto this it will not be seen by me as anything extraordinary that will have me forgive any other transgressions or policy criticisms especially regarding the environment. He will not be able to use this for political gain to wipe the slate clean so to speak. And I do believe that his advisors are pondering the advantages of playing this up regarding the political mileage it could get.

Even though under him the Patriot Act has been extended; he allows the targeting of American civilians already abroad without trial; the fact that the Military Commissions Act is still in force; and he has still said nothing about the infiltration of Homeland Security into Occupy protests. Therefore any attempt to play this up as if he has saved us all from the jaws of fascism will actually look politically contrived to me. I tend to want to see consistency in policy.

I would also like to believe I live in a country where such unconstitutional intrusions on our civil liberties would not even see the light of day at all but unfortunately, that isn't the case. However, there are still some glimmers of hope here. The people are waking up and by doing so those in power hard as they may try to hold that tide back will eventually be unable to and they know it. Freedom cannot be constricted by a piece of paper nor by men who place their own laws above the laws of nature.

So President Obama, I ask you to do your job in vetoing this hideous piece of fascist pablum, and for that you will get my thanks. However, I will not in any other way compromise my principles to give you carte blanche or suddenly develop short term memory loss regarding the damage that has already been done that you condoned and took part in. I will also not forgive this Congress that is now little more than a facilitator of tin horn policy. Bottomline then to all of you as employees of the American people: DO YOUR JOB.The NDAA, Sec.1031 is the hammer coming down on the last nail of the democracy coffin.... more

JanforGore
added this
1 month ago
|
50 comments

select your country

Community Spotlight

TAGS

tagged w/ Constitution

top videos

find current on tv

find current online

recent comments

© 2012 Current TV, LLC All Rights Reserved

the basics

follow us online

tools

stay in touch

© 2012 Current TV, LLC
All Rights Reserved