The
expansive and vague definitions of “Terrorism” that permeate  “AETA” are similar in the passed National
Defense Authorization ACT of 2012 (NDAA). Some
observers believe NDAA included the vague term “Belligerent” in the manner it
did, so U.S. Government would have authority granted by Congress to Indefinitely
Detain large numbers of Americans not involved in terrorism. Under NDAA, U.S. Government can deem
anyone a “Belligerent” for Indefinite Detention: the vague term “Belligerent”
could apply to Americans exercising 1st Amendment Rights—speaking
out for or against any issue including animal rights; or protesting any entity
of U.S. Government or its coalition partners.

Currently there are a number
of Multi-State Recall Petitions of Congressman that voted for The
National Defense Authorization ACT of 2012.

The passed
(Defense Authorization Act of 2012) appears more threatening to Americans than
(Hitler’s FASCIST 1933 Discriminatory LAWS)
that suspended provisions in the Reich Constitution that Protected German
Citizens’ Civil Liberties? For example—Note below that Hitler’s 1933
DISCRIMINATORY LAWS (stated time limits) German Citizens could be incarcerated
for Serious Disturbance of the Peace, Provoking Public Unrest, Rioting; Acts
that threatened National Security. In contrast Senators John McCain and Carl
Levin’s National Defense Authorization Act of 2012—mandates holding Americans’
(Indefinitely) in Military Custody for being a mere “Belligerent.” Some observers believe NDAA included the vague term “Belligerent” in the
manner it did, so U.S. Government would have authority granted by Congress to Indefinitely Detain large
numbers of Americans not involved in
terrorism. It if foreseeable U.S. Government will threaten Americans with
Indefinite Detention that refuse to act as informants.

Under the
passed National Defense Authorization, could some Americans be (Retroactively) subject to
Indefinite U.S. Military or Prison Detention without charges or right to an attorney or trial? Consider
that most American activists don’t know what other activists and groups they
networked or associated did in the past—perhaps illegal. Both the National
Authorization Act of 2012 and USA Patriot Act are expansive and vague—what constitutes (1) a terrorist act, (2) supporting
or aiding terrorists; (3) when someone is a “Combatant” or (4) “a Belligerent.”
For example, Americans advocating, attending or supporting a meeting or protest
demonstration against a U.S. Government Agency; Policy or U.S. Military
Action—could be charged with (1) (2) (3) and (4) under NDAA and the Patriot
Act.

History
Repeats Itself: When other
countries passed Police State Laws like The Defense Authorization Act of 2012,
Citizens increasingly abstained from politically speaking out; visiting
activist websites or writing comments that might be deemed inappropriate by the
Police State Government, e.g. cause someone to lose their job; be investigated;
disappeared, and or detained in Police/Military Custody. Some writers might be
dead-meat under NDAA. It appears
that “Americans” who write on the Internet or verbally express an opinion
against any entity of U.S. Government or its coalition partners—may under the Patriot Act or The Defense Authorization
Act—be deemed by U.S. Government (someone likely to engage in, support or provoke
violent acts or threaten National Security—to order an American writer’s indefinite military or
prison detention.

Is NDAA Retroactive? Can U.S. Government invoke
provisions of NDAA or the Patriot Act to assert a U.S. Citizen’s past or current writings (protected by the 1st Amendment) have
supported or aided terrorists; provoked combatants or belligerents as a premise
to order an author’s Indefinite Detention? The Defense Authorization Act of 2012 did more than Chill Free Speech—it
may FREEZE IT!

It should be
expected that indefinitely detained U.S. Citizens not involved
in terrorism or hostile activities, not given Miranda Warnings when
interrogated or allowed legal counsel; will also be prosecuted for
non-terrorist (ordinary crimes) because of their (alleged admissions) while held in Indefinite
Detention. See below: Hitler’s 1933 Fascist Laws that might appear mild in
several respects when set side by side with the National Authorization Act of
2012.

1933. ROBL. I 83.  

GERMANY Preliminary Compilation of
Selected Laws, Decrees, and Regulations:  

DISCRIMINATORY LAWS:

DECREE OF THE REICH
PRESIDENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE AND STATE

Note: Based on translations by State Department, National
Socialism, 1942 PP. 215-17, and Pollak, J.K., and Heneman, H.J., The Hitler
Decrees, (1934), pp. 10-11.7

In virtue of Section 48 (2) of the German Constitution,
the following is decreed as a defensive measure against Communist acts of
Violence, endangering the state:

Section 1

Sections 114, 115, 117, 118,
123, 124, and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until
further notice.
Thus, restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of
opinion, including freedom of the press, on the right of assembly and the right
of association, and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic, and
telephonic communications, and warrants for house-searches, orders for
confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond
the legal limits otherwise prescribed.

Section 2

If in a state the measures necessary for the restoration of public
security and order are not taken, the Reich Government may temporarily take
over the powers of the highest state authority.

Section 4

Whoever provokes, or appeals for or incites to the
disobedience of the orders given out by the supreme state authorities or the
authorities subject to then for the execution of this decree, or the orders
given by the Reich Government according to Section 2, is punishable—insofar as
the deed, is not covered by the decree with more severe punishment and with
imprisonment of not less that one month, or with a fine from 150 up to 15,000
Reich marks.

Who ever endangers human life by violating Section 1, is to
be punished by sentence to a penitentiary, under mitigating circumstances with
imprisonment of not less than six months and, when violation causes the death
of a person, with death, under mitigating circumstances with a penitentiary
sentence of not less that two years. In addition the sentence my include
confiscation of property.

Whoever provokes an inciter to or act contrary to public
welfare is to be punished with a penitentiary sentence, under mitigating
circumstances, with imprisonment of not less than three months.

Section 5

The crimes which under the Criminal Code are punishable
with penitentiary for life are to be punished with death: i.e., in Sections 81
(high treason), 229 (poisoning), 306 (arson), 311 (explosion), 312 (floods),
315, paragraph 2 (damage to railroad properties, 324 (general poisoning).

Insofar as a more severe punishment has not been previously
provided for, the following are punishable with death or with life imprisonment
or with imprisonment not to exceed 15 years:

1.            Anyone who undertakes to kill the Reich President or a
member or a commissioner of the Reich Government or of a state government, or
provokes to such a killing, or agrees to commit it, or accepts such an offer,
or conspires with another for such a murder;

2.            Anyone who under Section 115 (2) of the Criminal Code
(serious rioting) or of Section 125 (2) of the Criminal Code (serious
disturbance of the peace) commits the act with arms or cooperates consciously
and intentionally with an armed person;

3.            Anyone who commits a kidnapping under Section 239 of the
Criminal with the intention of making use of the kidnapped person as a hostage
in the political struggle.

Section 6

This decree enters in force on the day of its
promulgation.

Reich President

Reich Chancellor

Reich Minister of the
Interior                                                                             
Reich Minister of Justice