Analyzing Implications
First Summary
From my understanding, according to Terry Eastland, (Jan 2011) he leads us to believe that Republicans are responding to unlimited government, and that the Tea Party are guarding that situation ready to address and push it, if it is ignored. This is of course, what the Republicans wanted to be noted for in the media, but I am not sure after finding other sources that may express otherwise. There is a great deal of concern about the amount of control from both parties. Both are trying to pass through the senate, a bill this week that would leave citizens without trial and could be arrested by the right of the government, according to what they establish as being deemed right or wrong. This bill that both Republicans and Democrat Senators are trying to pass will be addressed this week. According to the ACLU (Nov 2011) the senate is preparing for a vote by this Monday or Tuesday that should concern every American! “This bill will direct the military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American Citizens and other civilians far from the battlefield.-even people in the United States itself”. (pg.1) This bill is being supported by both parties according to the article by the ACLU, this is a part of the National Defense Authorization Act bill, and this bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich) and John McCain (R-Ariz)and passed in a closed door committee meeting. Concluding the article by the ACLU, one republican senator explained “the law will basically say in law for the first time that our homeland is part of the battlefield” and that people can be prosecuted without charge or trial. What about your rights to a fair trial to be charged and tried? I think they must have totally ignored the constitution on this one. I am sure there will be no military looking in their direction or pointing a weapon at them, and I hope this bill will not be passed, because it could very well change life as we know it.
Second Summary
According to the article in Scientific American (2005)raising the concern of human inventory control there is a great deal of discretion presented by how this new technology can be used. The value of this, of course, depends upon how it is used. According to an article presented by MSN (2004) the FDA approves the computer chip for humans. I the past few years I have seen the differences between parties and many supporters blaming each party, however, there are implications of both sides that have supported these devices. The MSN article stated that in 2004, The US Department of Health and Human Services paid 139 million dollars in grants to help bring about President Bush’s push for electronic health records for most Americans with a decade. We are now in the year of 2011. This debate was noticed widely on Social Networking sites and great controversy I have read personally on postings relating to these issues and a great deal of blame was on the Health reform and the government taking control over healthcare and the privacy issues surrounding chips that could also impose upon the privacy of others. While one could say it would be good to keep up with medical records, another great concern would be more interference of the control of the government into the private lives of law abiding citizens. I think the bad clearly outweighs the good. Such technology can be trumped up to be an asset to people, but you have to look at the implications from the other side of the spectrum, which in my opinion would be a great loss of privacy and an injustice for the American people. In the first summary and this one as well, I would eagerly address that we have entirely too much governmental control, and that many details in the constitution are danced around or ultimately changed, overlooked or ignored. For whatever rights hold to the public, therefore, should deem enforceable and accountable to the governmental authorities as well.
References:
American Civil Liberties Union (Nov 2011) Senators demand the military lock up American citizens in a
“Battlefield” they define as being right outside your window.
Eastland, Terry (Jan 2011) The Weekly Standard: We the People
Ebsco Publishing (May 2005) Human Inventory Control. Scientific American. P. 8
Msnbc News (Oct 2004) FDA approves computer chip for humans.
2 comments:
The ACLU has a place in our society as a watchdog for civil liberty. I beleive they have the right idea about NDAA, however their approach to civil liberty lacks a lot of grass roots sensibility. It appears that taking on the Supreme Court in stead of the Justice of the Peace is priority in thier agenda. Tat is relevant here because what this LAW dose is dispense with the need for justice by replacing it with summary judgement. That is how a military works.
The summary is the apprehension part where the body is held captive until the judgement is rendered. There isn't any possibility of voluntary presentation on the part of the suppected. Note, I did not use the term accused. The summary is based on suspicion of improper if not illegal activity. The judgement then awaits the filling in of the blanks better known as writing the story after the facts or altering the fact to suit the story you want told.
This was what happen to Jesus. It was impossible to find him innocent of being righteous so he was sentence to crucifixion to demonstrate the penealty for such activity. The story, or court testimonies were all true accounts of his activities which to be very honest demonstrated the fallibility of the Pax Romanus,(Peace of Rome).
In 2012, we have a methodology that we may be able to halt or reverse, but the process is misunderstood by the very people that have the ability to do so. The ACLU should be preparing suit to protect the rights of the offices local Justices of the Peace and there in to nullify the ability of the NDAA to summarily capture an American citizen and physically hold them in incarceration without being subjected to civil suit. What this means is that the militarywould have to refrain from arresting persons and hiding in a place outside the precint of their residence without the presentation of the citizen to a local Justice Magistrate for the posting of bail. Additionally, if the person arrested were moved out of the precint, the Military / Federal officiers (whatever) would be required to post an indeminity bond to assure that the person would not be harmed in any manner detrimental to their future earnings capabilities. So, torture and beating would result in very expensive forfeitures that would go directly to the captive or the surviving families in the case of accidental or inintentional fatalities while under arrest or detention, as the case may be.
The Romans didn't have the technology to embed proximity broadcasting micro-chips in humans and neither did the Nazis. The bottom line is that if I want to have a chip insert into me for medical purposes, that is my decision and I should not be allowed to make it for dependants or strangers.
This is my opinion, I hope there are others.
Becky, how perfect for God to intervene here. How beautiful to 'know' these things are what the Lord would have you share. Thank you for putting this out there for all of us to read; for raising awareness to what is truly taking place behind the scenes, in the dark. God's Word tells us not to be afraid of those things hidden. He is a God of justice and may He bless you richly for your obedience and passion as He uses you to enact His justice on evil doers. I know this must have just blown your mind.
Post a Comment