Due Process // Current TV

Any American can be arrested without cause on US soil - NDAA Martial Law Plan

Any American can be arrested without cause on US soil - NDAA Martial Law Plan This... more

letsliveinpeace
added this
1 month ago
|
13 comments

3 Supreme Court Decisions to Watch

The Supreme Court is back in session with major decisions coming on the legality of... more

letsliveinpeace
added this
17 days ago
|
5 comments

US courts already enforcing SOPA-style shut-downs

While activists waging for a free Internet advocate against the possible passing of the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, the US court system is already favoring big business by thwarting third-party competition without any objections.

In at least three cases recently, the US court system has attacked websites that employed unauthorized usage of a major label’s branding, specifically True Religion clothing, Chanel cologne and Philip Morris. In the latest case filed by the cigarette giant, prosecution for Morris lobbied to have several websites and their contents and funds seized and transferred without the defense ever able to present a case.

As Congress debates the provisions that could make up the controversial SOPA bill, it looks as if the US courts are already shutting down websites for what could be considered unauthorized use or infringement without a just trial ever being carried out.
In the case against websites advertising allegedly counterfeit Chanel products, a District Court judge in Nevada allowed the legitimate manufacturer to seize around 600 domain names that were related to but not affiliated with the company. Additionally, restraining orders and injunctions were handed to the biggest search engine and Web companies in the world barring sites such as Google and Yahoo! from indexing or linking to the sites in question. In that instance, the federal judge allowed Chanel to seize the domains and transfer them to US-based registrar GoDaddy without any say from the defendants. And, according to the court ruling, those that even “promote” the sale of Chanel goods, legitimate or otherwise, can be added to the injunction and seized in the future.

In that instance, attorney Venkat Balasubramani of the Eric Goldman Technology and Marketing Law Blog writes simply, “Wow.”

Balasubramani may be surprised, but even more surprising is how rampant these cases are becoming. The third case causing the seizure of competing Philip Morris sites has come within only a month of the other two. Eric Goldman himself adds, “Only hearing one side of the story isn't enough to trigger the kind of draconian remedies the courts are granting.”

“That kind of result wouldn't happen with real due process,” adds the associate professor of law from Santa Clara University and administrator of the legal blog.
The website Techdirt.com has been following the cases themselves and note that to see the excessiveness in these cases, one doesn’t have to go much further than to realize that, “based solely on the declaration of a Philip Morris employee, the court is ordering the full transfer not just of websites, but of any funds being sent to a website.”
In the case of True Religion court ruling, Techdirt calls it essentially a “kill switch” for the allegedly-guilty websites, which were found at fault with once again no due process.

Currently Congress is debating whether it should impose a similar cloak over the Internet as a whole, causing for any site to allegedly broadcast copyrighted material to be seized and the administrator to suffer from immense fines and jail time. Given these three cases, however, do we really need the Senate and House to put the stamp on it?
"The fight against SOPA [the Stop Online Piracy Act] may be a red herring in some ways," writes Balasubramani, "since IP plaintiffs are fashioning very similar remedies in court irrespective of the legislation. Thus, even if SOPA is defeated, it may turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory — opponents may win the battle but may not have gained much as a result."
http://rt.com/usa/news/us-court-sopa-morris-203/While activists waging for a free Internet advocate against the possible passing of... more

MotherForTruth
added this
1 month ago
|
2 comments

The Obama Administration Will Not Veto Defense Authorization Bill!

Cenk is steamed to say the least!

Leen61
added this
1 month ago
|
203 comments

This Is What “Indefinite Detention” Looks Like (Video)

THIS EXAMPLE VIDEO IS AN ''EXAMPLE'' OF WHAT THEY CAN DO LEGALLY NOW, READ INFO BELOW:
Many of us have wondered if directed to; would our own military turn on us? It appears that this is the plan and has been all along, yet the question remains......would they actually do it if ordered to?

S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill. Senators Carl Levin (D) MI and John McCain (R) AZ, are bringing this bill to the Senate floor on Monday after having held secret committee meetings while never holding even one hearing on this bill which authorizes military action against US citizens, right here in the United States.

While the bill appears on the surface to be about authorizing defense funding for the illegal wars, the ongoing unwarranted surveillance of the US population and the continuing violations of the 4th Amendment as applied to US citizens, many of the provisions of the bill do not pertain to unidentifiable terrorists or any other villain carefully crafted to terrorize the country. The fact is, as a result of the false flag attacks on 9/11, we have massive numbers of police state "laws" on the books which created "terrorists" or redefined "terrorist activity" to include everything from political dissent and free speech, even including targeting of US citizens for mentioning or referencing the Constitution or supporting third party, non-approved candidates for public office.

When this bill passes with these police state provisions included (I believe it will) you can expect your senator who voted "yes" on the bill to maintain that they only did so because otherwise the funding for the wars would have ceased (we could only hope) and they have to continue to fight the terrorists, terrorism, or what ever lame excuse pops into their heads to explain why they voted to pass what is clearly a police state bill.

The bill itself was drafted in secret and I believe it would be to our benefit to know who actually drafted that bill.

Who were the "stakeholders" who actually wrote the bill introduced by these two traitorous senators. We know they didn't write it, they never do. All bills are written by stakeholders who blow through the doors of congress carry bags of cash to buy the support of politicians who make their living selling off our rights along with anything else that isn't nailed down.

S.1867 includes these provisions highlighted by the ACLU:

If enacted, sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA would:

1) Explicitly authorize the federal government to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others picked up inside and outside theUnited States;

(2) Mandate military detention of some civilians who would otherwise be outside of military control, including civilians picked up within the United States itself; and

(3) Transfer to the Department of Defense core prosecutorial, investigative, law enforcement, penal, and custodial authority and responsibility now held by the Department of Justice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=hG_R6U_FfesTHIS EXAMPLE VIDEO IS AN ''EXAMPLE'' OF WHAT THEY CAN DO LEGALLY... more

letsliveinpeace
added this
1 month ago
|
5 comments

Betrayal?: Obama to Sign Defense Authorization Act (VIDEO)

I happen to think that, as Progressives, we have a greater responsibility to question... more

StewSteve
added this
1 month ago
|
0 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

The Due-Process-Free Assassination Of U.S. Citizens Is Now Reality

By Glenn Greenwald
Salon

It was first reported in January of last year that the Obama administration had compiled a hit list of American citizens whom the President had ordered assassinated without any due process, and one of those Americans was Anwar al-Awlaki. No effort was made to indict him for any crimes (despite a report last October that the Obama administration was "considering" indicting him). Despite substantial doubt among Yemen experts about whether he even has any operational role in Al Qaeda, no evidence (as opposed to unverified government accusations) was presented of his guilt. When Awlaki's father sought a court order barring Obama from killing his son, the DOJ argued, among other things, that such decisions were "state secrets" and thus beyond the scrutiny of the courts. He was simply ordered killed by the President: his judge, jury and executioner. When Awlaki's inclusion on President Obama's hit list was confirmed, The New York Times noted that "it is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing."

After several unsuccessful efforts to assassinate its own citizen, the U.S. succeeded today (and it was the U.S.). It almost certainly was able to find and kill Awlaki with the help of its long-time close friend President Saleh, who took a little time off from murdering his own citizens to help the U.S. murder its. The U.S. thus transformed someone who was, at best, a marginal figure into a martyr, and again showed its true face to the world. The government and media search for The Next bin Laden has undoubtedly already commenced.

What's most striking about this is not that the U.S. Government has seized and exercised exactly the power the Fifth Amendment was designed to bar ("No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law"), and did so in a way that almost certainly violates core First Amendment protections (questions that will now never be decided in a court of law). What's most amazing is that its citizens will not merely refrain from objecting, but will stand and cheer the U.S. Government's new power to assassinate their fellow citizens, far from any battlefield, literally without a shred of due process from the U.S. Government. Many will celebrate the strong, decisive, Tough President's ability to eradicate the life of Anwar al-Awlaki -- including many who just so righteously condemned those Republican audience members as so terribly barbaric and crass for cheering Governor Perry's execution of scores of serial murderers and rapists -- criminals who were at least given a trial and appeals and the other trappings of due process before being killed.

From an authoritarian perspective, that's the genius of America's political culture. It not only finds way to obliterate the most basic individual liberties designed to safeguard citizens from consummate abuses of power (such as extinguishing the lives of citizens without due process). It actually gets its citizens to stand up and clap and even celebrate the destruction of those safeguards.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/By Glenn Greenwald Salon It was first reported in January of last year that the... more