E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSCongress and the White House are headed for a showdown over a massive, $662 billion defense bill that would require the military to hold suspected terrorists linked to al-Qaida or its affiliates, even those captured on U.S. soil, and detain some indefinitely without trial.
The Senate voted 93-7 Thursday night for the legislation, which must be reconciled with a House-passed version in the closing days of the session. The White House has threatened a veto of the Senate bill over the policies on handling terror suspects and has criticized similar provisions in the House bill.
Overall, the bill would authorize money for military personnel, weapons systems, national security programs in the Energy Department, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Reflecting a period of austerity and a winding down of decade-old conflicts, the bill is $27 billion less than President Barack Obama requested and $43 billion less than Congress gave the Pentagon this year.
In a resounding vote, the Senate unanimously backed an amendment to impose harsh sanctions on Iran as fears about Tehran developing a nuclear weapon outweighed concerns about driving up oil prices that would hit economically strapped Americans at the gas pump.
"Iran's actions are unacceptable and pose a danger to the United States and the entire world," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
In an escalating fight with the White House, the bill would ramp up the role of the military in handling terror suspects. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and FBI Director Robert Mueller both oppose the provisions as does the White House, which said it cannot accept any legislation that "challenges or constrains the president's authorities to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists and protect the nation."
Late Thursday, a White House official said the veto threat still stands.
The bill would require military custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates and involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. American citizens would be exempt. The bill does allow the executive branch to waive the authority based on national security and hold a suspect in civilian custody.
The legislation also would deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention.
The series of detention provisions challenges citizens' constitutional rights, tests the boundaries of executive and legislative branch authority and sets up a confrontation with the Democratic commander in chief. Civil rights groups fiercely oppose the bill.
"The bill is an historic threat to American citizens and others because it expands and makes permanent the authority of the president to order the military to imprison without charge or trial American citizens," said Christopher Anders, ACLU senior legislative counsel.
The bill reflects the politically charged dispute over whether to treat suspected terrorists as prisoners of war or criminals. The administration insists that the military, law enforcement and intelligence agents need flexibility in prosecuting the war on terror after they've succeeded in killing Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki.
Republicans counter that their efforts are necessary to respond to an evolving, post-Sept. 11 threat, and that Obama has failed to produce a consistent policy on handling terror suspects.
The House-passed bill would limit Obama's authority to transfer terrorist suspects from the U.S. naval facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to installations in the United States, even for trial. It also would make it difficult for the administration to move detainees to foreign countries.
On Iran, Sens. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., had widespread bipartisan support for their amendment, which would target foreign financial institutions that do business with the Central Bank, barring them from opening or maintaining correspondent operations in the United States. It would apply to foreign central banks only for transactions that involve the sale or purchase of petroleum or petroleum products.
The sanctions on petroleum would only apply if the president determines there is a sufficient alternative supply and if the country with jurisdiction over the financial institution has not significantly reduced its purchases of Iranian oil.
Leave a Comment:
I think we'd all better get on the phone and make sure our President vetoes this bill. It's very frightening.
ModerateItaly,
It looks like you didn't read the news report carefully.
Senate led by Harry Reid and the democrats had the guts to reduce the Defense bill $27B less than what the President requested. In fact, with upcoming peace dividends, we should cut it even more, perhaps around $550B and look for quicker savings from troops withdrawal from Europe, Afghanistan, and Iraq. We should let the Europeans shoulder more of the burden for defending their continent. As Obama said last month, we should focus on the Asia-Pacific theater, with the raise of China looming. Lastly, we should cut fraud, waste, abuses, and un-wanted military hardware procurement. Pentagon should learn to do more with less just like the Corporate America has done. Contrasting US defense spending with the Europeans, the whole of Europe including Scandinavian countries are slated to spend less than $220 Billion in 2012 for their own defense. We should take a cue from them.
I am sure the House version will be more than $662 billion Senate one and we should make sure the Senate version prevails or even more cuts (when it goes to appropriation). If you are asking Obama to veto the Defense bill because of language in the bill about the AQ prisoners, that should be the last thing we should worry about now. We should worry about our economy and ways to lower federal spending.
@ moderate....Thank you!!! Some days I feel so discouraged reading these posts.... Man, I knew it would be hard to get people to wake up, but some days I feel it is hopeless...anyway thank you again....I feel renewed.
@Tea..... I think you need to read carefully..... don't be distracted by $$$$ signs freedom is more important!!!
Here is a petition to ask Obama to veto this...please sign and share.
http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/ndaa/?source=fb
Here is another petition against the senators that voted to take away more of our freedoms....
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/892/petition-to-impeach-all-senators-who-voted-for-us-is-a-battlefield-and-to-detain-us-citizens-without/
PLEASE American people stand up and fight for our Country and our Freedom...before it is too late.
"suspects" can be held indefinately? Then later we decide whether or not they are guilty? Unamerican. Veto!
Officer Lewis is still speaking out.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEOZ4LUChFw&feature=uploademail
tea sucks
That is exactly how they get evil stuff passed threw, as a rider on a more important bill.
Tea, this is exactly how they like to chip away at your rights. Protecting our civil rights should always be our number one priority.
See how well that distraction worked on you.
If I'm reading this correctly, any American citizen, within the U.S., could be labeled as a "suspected terrorist" and detained indefinately without the right to trial. Seems to me it directly violates the constitution. How can they support this?
Dave - Looks like it! ANY American citizen, liberal, conservative, OWSer, TeaPartier, etc... You know, if this is the agenda, why bother passing anything at all? Whose permission do they need to do this? Certainly not this countries citizens.
There are 140 million tax filers (according to IRS data). Each of those tax payers must pay $4,800 in taxes to cover a $662 billion defense budget. And that does not include the other defense support provided through out the discretionary budget.
Every tax payer is paying $400 per month in taxes to cover defense.
No wonder Congress wants the military to become the judiciary branch - courts and judges take money away from defense. Kill social safety net programs - more money for defense. Kill environmental and conservation programs - more money for defense. Kill regulations - more money for defense. The one thing that cannot be done - cut taxes. That would take money away from defense ...
Violation? Yes, but remember that the U.S. interned every Japanese-American after Pearl Harbor and confiscated all of their property. And NO ONE screamed bloody Murder. And remember that the U.S. NEVER did the same for the German-Americans.
Now if this passes they can arrest you if you are of a different religion, a wrong Nationality, a wrong skin color, the wrong sex, the wrong political party, and anything else that they don't like just by putting your name on a list.
Germany during WWII again, but now here.
Welcome to the new United Nazi States. Seig Heil!
In case you didn't notice the vote was 93-7 in favor. It really doesn't mater what he does veto wise. Two thirds majority over rides veto.
@ wayne................ the people standing together can over ride this...
If the veto gets overridden I have one piece of advice: get the hell out of there before you don't have that right anymore. If this bill is allowed to become law then it makes America a certified fascist dictatorship. American soldiers fought and died to stop the spread of fascism, they would surely be rolling in their graves if they found out America chose to become the Fourth Reich through the democratic process they gave their lives protecting
This is nothing more than a broader over-reach of the Patriot Act. Obama autopenned it back into law and now is upset that the senate is pushing for even more egregious curtailing of civil rights. I'm with Obama on the veto even though I think he should have scrapped the Unpatriot Act completely. Sorry, I don't think creating an even larger police state that we currently inhabit will make us 'safe.' Currently our biggest fear and danger is the vast and ever-increasing over-reach and oppression of the Federal Government.
I'm glad people got past the money in the article and read what our illustrious senate (both sides) are trying to do to our country. Get on the phone, make sure the president vetoes this bill. Call your representatives. Scream bloody murder. Make sure and vote against every senator who voted for this bill.
The current NDAA for Fiscal Year 2012 does not contain the provision to arrest Americans without cause. The Udall Amendment essentially makes the explicit language that protects us null and void. It did not pass in the bill that passed today. HOWEVER. President Obama is not content with this.
2011/12/02/white-house-veto-indefinite-detention_n_1126399.html
He states this is not adequate in order to protect ourselves from terrorists because he wants to keep Gitmo OPEN and allow an essential nationwide martial law to be put in effect.
Udall comments that he also finds our "national security at risk" because his amendment was not present.
futures/9/0/169433809.html
The sad part is, this is essentially the military's budget. Since President Obama is threatening his veto, he is essentially putting the budget on hold and trying to strong arm the amendment into existence.
IF YOU READ THE AMENDMENT, it may seem as though the covered persons includes us. But the very Authorizations referenced includes us as liable targets.
tl;dr THIS COUNTRY IS A JOKE
Let us finally be honest with ourselves and say it out loud; our government is not Constitutional, not anymore! It is a thing to be abhorred, not admired, and certainly not to be trusted.
This new Defense is actually an action against us, the American People. We will become terrorists for saying the wrong thing, for paying with cash, for a lot of stupid reasons NONE of which is "protections against terrorism. Go Read IT in FULL.
"Governments do not keep people safe. Governments are historically predisposed to ending far more lives than they protect, especially when they have strayed from their original mandates. When a government goes rogue, or has been honed as a tool for control rather than defense, its directives lean towards self preservation, not the preservation of the public. That is to say, the government and those who directly benefit from its manipulation set policies that ensure their own safety, and no one else’s.
Without a doubt, all the anti-4th Amendment legislation that has been passed over the course of last decade is focused not on some sinister force, foreign or domestic. Instead, it has been focused on average American citizens, because, whether we want to admit it or not, the government sees US as their greatest enemy." (From When governments go rogue)
There was a time when even I would have considered this view as a bit “extreme”. However, I would now have to point out the introduction of bills and executive orders like the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which essentially erases Posse Comitatus and allows for Martial Law to be instituted with extreme prejudice under executive authority:
As well as the attempted passage of the Enemy Belligerents Act, which would allow for the capture, torture, and indefinite incarceration of American citizens as “enemy combatants:
Not to mention the National Emergency Centers Act which allows for the detention of civilians in military and FEMA run facilities:
Or the Obama Administration’s continuance of Bush doctrine which allows for the assassination of U.S. citizens designated as “enemy combatants”:
And most recently, the National Defense Authorization Act, a defense spending action which is being used to coattail legislation which decimates all Constitutional checks and balances and leaves the door open for the government to declare any region they wish a “combat zone”. These provisions are just a rewritten combination of the Enemy Belligerents Act (both bills were fostered by the hand of John McCain) and the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, giving government free reign to designate any person, even an American citizen, as an enemy combatant. This means that anyone, including you, could one day be detained without Habeas Corpus, without fair trial, without due process, without legal representation, forever. Period.
President Obama stated “the Constitution is a document of negative liberties.” How is he looking at the Constitution in order to have that opinion? The Bill of Rights is not a list of negative liberties to each of us, but a list of written restrictions upon the federal government. The Bill of Rights do not restrict US citizens, they limit what the politicians and bureaucrats can do to or against us. In order to view the Bill of Rights as “negative liberties”, Obama and his administration would have to be seeing them from how they stop what they can do to the people.
The question to ask yourself is:
If there were never intended to be action to defend the Constitution from those who are domestically attempting to destroy its power and authority, why would each Oath require it of those taking the Oaths?
The three branches of our government, the Military, all Law Enforcement, all Heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take an Oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity to get into the Office or Position they want.
They then must keep that Oath until they leave office or position they currently occupy to be able to stay in that position.
If they do not keep that Oath, they no longer meet the legal requirements for them to stay in that position or office and must be replaced. They also make themselves Domestic Enemies of the USA and are prosecutable.
Domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution.
It is time to take back our country. It is time to arrest and prosecute the domestic enemies within the three branches of OUR government. When they serve their time, then we must strip them of US Citizenship and kick them our of the USA forever for trying to destroy her.
KNINE,, I think maybe you may have something some what messed up. I was in the Army,I had to swaer an oath to get in . When I was discharged, NOBODY BY WORD OF MOUTH OR WORDS ON PAPER RELEASED ME FROM THAT OATH,NOBODY IS EVER LEAGELLY RELEASED FROM THAT OATH.
Unless you are convected of crimmial acts.
Taking an oath, swearing on that oath is not the same as actually upholding that oath. Our politicans play lip service to the oath of office. It means nothing to them, it is merely a formality, something they have to go through in order to get the job. Our servicemen, by and large, do take that oath seriously, they sacrifice their lives if necessary, in order to uphold that oath. Perhaps the politicans should have a penalty attached for not upholding the oath they swore to, something like prison or in extreme instances, death.
The evil has arrived and feels strong enough to show itself for what it is. Please veto this Mr. President.
Don't trust the military much, - remember Pat Tillman?
The only thing you should trust is yourself and your family, not this government. Remember that the founders didn't trust the government they were creating. Thus, the seperation of powers and the limitations on the power of the Federal Governemnt in the Constitution and later the Bill of Rights.
These limitations have been steadily been eroded and the Federal Government now has given itself the power to regulate EVERYTHING. This is bad enough but when you realize that the Federal government is owned then things start looking very bad for the people.
We know that the TARP was 700 Billion - we now know that the undercover FED program lent 7.7 TRILLION to the banks at 0.01%. What were the banks and wall street doing with this money - they were lending it to the Federal Government by buying treasuries at 3% interest.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-december-1-2011-bob-costas
Do you know who the owners are?
"The Senate voted 93-7 Thursday night for the legislation, which must be reconciled with a House-passed version in the closing days of the session. The White House has threatened a veto of the Senate bill"
Let's see now - 93-7 in the Democrat controlled Senate, and Obama threatens a veto, which would only require 67 to override.
Somehow, I don't think Obama has a very credible stand. He doesn't even seen to have any influence on his own Party. I wonder if ANY Democratic Congressmen and women will want Obama anywhere near their reelection campaigns?
I agree with comments 1 & 2 . But I am afraid that there is something else in that bill , that congress doesn't want us to know . Congress loves pork , earmarks and the like . What are they also trying to ram down our throats ??????????????
bob
I agree, and the scary part is that history has a way of repeating itself, as it stands the government is most likely watching these threads closely to see whos computer they need to tap to make sure they dont get too bold, the last thing the government wants is for those of us who are not willing to let them run roughshod over us without a fight organize and stand against them. dont be surprised if eventually we see these posts be deleated on a regular basis. be vigilant my friends,,,
Bob, again, when your talking about losing your civil rights, pork should be the last thing your worried about.
Besides, it's easier to tack your pork on to a less contiversial bill.
Brian
I agree with your tack on pork to a more mundane bill . But take a closer look at the civil wrights we have now . Slowly over a long time now . Congress has been stripping away at our civil wrights . The Patriot Act was the big one . Not only that the CIA and the NSA also monitor all of our cell phone calls , E-mails and internet postings such as this one. My friend big brother is alive and well living in Fort Mead Maryland .
bob
The Fascist , Cooporate,States of America is fast approaching, led by the F.E.D., better get your ammo ready. This will be, The NEW WORLD ORDER that Bush Sr. was spouting, just 11 years ago.
Hell ya!!
Bob-1819: I think you may be right. I have taken the oath like my other brothers and sisters to defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic. All the movement of military equipment and FEMA is starting to raise my eyebrows.
Im ready!!! cant wait actually, the sooner we get this over with the sooner we can rebuild, too many good people hungry and too many who just are lost, no work, lower pay, higher taxes and expenses, higher everything we are all affected, and that includes many who have served the country and then been tossed aside by the system, there are still vietnam vets who cant get taken care of, real problems, that the government says are not there, I cant even imagine the numbers of those who have been in Afganistan and Iraq, its a shame, we are all in this together,
I won't be crying when politicians and CEOs are swinging from lightpoles. Doubt many will. Hell it will probably be the new hit reality show. With a big emphasis on 'reality'.
wwaugh: Check on the Militias that have been on the up rise in key Republican States. There are plenty of changes. PS: These are the Ultra-Right Wing Militias that are on the rise.
What? Massive? I thought that in the new Washington World of Finance (the WWF for short) this would be considered "petty cash".
Just wait!
sadly you are correct
First Al-Queda suspects, who is next? White supremacists? OWS protesters? Catholics? Gays? This is the most scary assault on freedom in the United States since the Patriot Act.
Please read this and share....there are many more if you look on line....Please
http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/ndaa/?source=fb
So we're saying that someone who is suspected of giving money to an organization that might support Al-Quaida (or the terrorist group of the week) can be picked up, detained and kept in lock down indefinitely. No miranda rights, no lawyer, no phone call.
We didn't do this to Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy or Charles Manson. The worst serial killers in American history had civil rights but a suspected terrorist sympathiser doesn't? This is totally out of proportion.
Find out if your senator voted for this and let them know that it's unacceptable.
White Supremacists are NOT to be touched. They and the Neo-Nazi and Neo-Facists ARE within the Republican Party. Have been since the mid 50's to the mid 60's.
Dems want to put in a permanent tax raise on the "rich" (40% of which are small business owners who need the money to expand and hire) in order to extrend a temporary cut of $30 a week. Reps want to cut into the 180 billion that the GAO says is wasted in the federal bureaucracy each year in order to pay for this piddly tax break. And what about the retired and public sector workers who don't pay into social security. We get nothing anyway. The whole tax cut thing is a political ploy - which is all that Obama and his liberal minions have to offer these days.
As opposed to when Dubbya gave the same tax break, but unfunded? At least they are trying to cover the loss of revenue. More than can be said for "others". Not saying I agree with the tax increase, because I don't, but c'mon. The real political ploy here is that Repubs are only fighting this thing because Dems are supporting it.
Public sector workers, including Congress, pay into Social Security and Medicare.
@GoUSA
No Congress does not. Look it up. totally different program.
Since when are small business owners "rich". Unless you consider big banks or oil companies small business.
Congress has paid into SS and Medicare since 1984:
You might do the research before you call someone out.
I'll make this simple. Indefinate detainment means I don't have enough evidence to try you, but I know you're guilty. Is this who we've become?
Would not surprise me if the media begin a new twist of misinformation to bolster obamas "hope and change" administration now that we are less than 30 days away from the first primary.
It'll be an award-winning review for obama from here until election time.
Thanks for supplying us with the first comment illustrating the delusional paranoia of the far right.
Liberalnewssucks - It would seem that people like you are fine with the United States of America becoming a police state so long as President Obama is voted out of office. Some of us won't let this happen. Suggest you stay out of the line of fire.
for you both: whatever it takes for obama to leave is the right course of action. He sucks! If you support him, you suck too!
My question is if you didn't like Bush --- How could you possibly like Obama?
The patriot act was renewed and ENHANCED. The wars continue in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan. Obama even started bombing Libya, Yemen, Somalia via Presidential Executive orders and United Nations mandates. The dramatic expansion in the use of special forces go far beyond the covert missions authorized by George W. Bush. Countries include Iran, Georgia, Ukraine, Bolivia, Paraguay, Ecuador, Peru, Yemen, Pakistan, Uganda Nigeria and the Philippines. This administration is keeping Blackwater(rebranded Xe) armed and dangerous in Afghanistan, rewarding them with a $120 million contract. So much for the anti-war, peace candidate.
Haliburton, Kellog-Brown and Root got the sweetheart deals under Bush. Goldman Sachs, GE, Crystler got the sweetheart deals under Obama. If the Healthcare "reform" goes through, we add the Pharmaceutical companies and the Medical Industrial complex to that list.
Obama, like Bush is pushing for more of the NAFTA style trade deals. Another sweetheart deal that only benefits the GIANT corporations who can afford to offshore their jobs. Jobs that will never come back.
It's a game of bipartisan spending and partisan blaming. Both parties have been running away with our Freedoms and our money. Call them whatever you want, Republicans or Democrats ---but recognize them for what they are ...
Corporatists/Globalists/Warmongers.
There is only one Presidential candidate that has integrity, morality, honesty and has proven so over the years. He is the one who predicted our economic crisis that has come to fruition. He is the only one that has the balls to tell us like it is -- even when the truth hurts. He has NEVER taken money from special interests, his only special interest is the Constitution. Ronald Earnest Paul. We all have a choice. We can side with Liberty for all -or- we can vote in another establishment candidate, beholden to corporate interests and maintain the status quo. The choice is clear, stand with Liberty or help to usher in the militarized police state run by politically connected corporations.
Liberalnewssucks. Go away. Your too stupid to be speaking in public. Just be glad you still have that right.
Obama 2012 - correcting an error.
@Liberalnewssucks
Have a nice suspension. Sally does not allow personal attacks
liberalnewssucks, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
Anyone in support of this or the UNpatriotic act might as well wipe their arse with the constitution and then p1ss on the graves of the founding fathers.
In the words of Benjamin Frankin: "Those who would give up freedom for security deserve neither".
Scary times when our congress is owned by a plutocracy of rich business men; Koch brothers, Grover Norquist, Karl Rove will be our masters if we don't do something about it quickly!!!
President Obama...stand your ground!!
I am against this bill since it denies due process. But, Obama, hypocrite much? He ordered the murder of a suspectedterrorist; a US citizen on foreign soil plus killed another US citizen in the fall out. BOTH without due process. That act FAR exceeds what the Senate is proposing. At least the Senate version, they are just held indefinitely, not murdered. The executive AND legislative branches both need to be reigned in.
As usual, another Texan displaying Texas Intelligence. Has it dawned on you at all that making a potential police state "constitutional" might be a little more serious than covert action to kill a hand full of terrorists. I know it's a matter of degrees but come on! I agree with the branches being reigned in but you lost me with the anti-Obama rant.
They need to be tossed, not reigned in, they are already out of control, the patriot act and the eavesdropping they do is mind boggling, if the people knew the truth about what goes on they wouldt be so passive.
I agree Kulafarmer!!!! Keep trying to wake people up!!!
petition.....to help stop this madness!!!
http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/ndaa/?source=fb
Ol_doc, the legislation hardly makes indefinite detention without benefit of trial, of "even U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders" constitutional. The principle of "constitutional review" rests with the judiciary branch alone. I do question the necessity and long-term wisdom of this particular aspect of the legislation. Vigilantism, whether inside or outside of the law, has a long history of evolving past its original intent into something ugly. At the very least, certain aspects of this legislation should require review every two years, without which they expire. I am curious and would like to know how it can be that 93 out of 100 US Senators...roughly 14 out of 15 overall, and 6 out of 7 of the same party as the President who threatens to veto it...think this law, as-is, is just peachy-keen.
p.s. The literal translation of "KGB" (Komitet Gosudarstbennoi Bezopastnosti) is "Committee of State Safety". The best figurative translation, however, is "Department of Homeland Security".
Ol Doc
Neither is acceptable. We cannot give carte blanche to any president or congress to decide the fate of American citizens without the right to due process. It should not be up to Obama (or any other President) to decide IF an American is a terrorist. Do you not remember Nixon and his hate list?
Maybe YOU need to get a little more education. Is it OK for Obama to decide WHO is a terrorist just because the American happened to be on foreign soil at the time of his death? Al Awlaki was never proven to be a terrorist, only suspected of encouraging terrorism. He was never tried,; not even in absentia. Next anyone who talks against the government can be deemed terroristic threats. The only difference between what Obama did and what Congress wants to do is the number of people deciding the fate of people. Police state or dictatorship? They are both equally disastrous.
Exactly Texana Deb! There was zero evidence against Al Awlaki. He had not been known to kill anyone. Timothy McVeigh actually killed people, and even he got a trial. It boils down to the rule of law (Constitution) --- Not the dictates of Homeland Security or the Executive Branch. To those of you worried about security, just remember, there is nothing more insecure than a political promise. Liberties taken away are not easily regained.
Sincerus: You are exactly right. Without the rule of law, we are all subject to the whims of whoever happens to be in power at the time. The US Constitution protects us from that.
Remain vigilant my friends.
What a surprise. Usually the GOP congress and the President get on so well. Once in a while, like the rest of us, congress has to live with the consequences of it's decisions or lack of them. The Super committee failed to get the job done. Congress failed to get the job done. The agreement was if you don't get a budget deal then automatic cuts would kick in. Now the GOP wants to change the rules and not do the cuts. Congress. live with your inaction and the failure to get the job done. The cuts were part of the game and unfortunately you loose. The GOP sacred cow, the military, should go under the knife. The budget is raft with excess and needs to be brought under control.
@Johnny.... please over look the $$$$$ what is more important is our Freedom!
Johnny
The vote was 93 to 7. The Dems have 51 Senators, 2 Independents who usually vote with the Dems and the Repubs have 47. This is NOT a GOP issue. Actually, it is the first time in a long time that the Senate came together across party lines to pass a bill. Across both party lines, they have failed the American public.
This is why I am so thankful we have an intelligent president in power. Heaven help us if one of the loonies on the right actually gets that power!!
I know right it will be krystallnacht part 2
The G in GOP should stand for Gestapo
Johnny, it is unbecoming of the President to hold hostage the very military of whose chain-of-command he is Commander-in-Chief, a power of the office granted to him by the Constitution whether he likes it or not. It would do well for him not to piss off the palace guard.
[quote]
The legislation also would deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention.
[/quote]
Don't do that, stop this government spending, stop the defense spending, and stop caring about other countries' problems. Just who do you people think you're representing anyway?
Teapublicans are going to LOVE this one.. Police state tactics seem to really resonate with them..
""The legislation also would deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention.""
K1200RS, that's where you're wrong. Tea Party Republicans do care deeply about the Constitution and we know a "slippery slope" when we see one. Pragmatism is a great thing, but if the Constitution does not guarantee due process for the accused, no matter how unpopular or heinous, then the Constitution has no "teeth" and therefore no meaning. As someone else pointed out, even Timothy McVeigh had his day in court, a man who killed little children by the dozen. I'm not too worried about the Al Alwaki guy (an American expatriate who renounced his citizenship and was killed abroad in a military strike) but the thought of ever, for any reason, doing the same to an American on American soil gives me chills. It should be plainly obvious to anyone of any political affiliation, how readily such powers can, and will, be abused, and it scares me to think that 93 out of 100 senators voted for a bill with that clause buried within it. I want to know, what were they thinking, or were they even thinking at all?.
"Those who would give up freedom for security deserve neither".
Can you imagine being in a cab and getting picked up because the driver is Al Qaeda linked and being indefinitly held without representation or trial? It can happen and it can happen to you. This is a "be afraid to hang out with your neighbor, or even hire someone, because he or she looks like he comes from the middle east" bill. It is what the soldiers are fighting against in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is becoming Libya after we took Daffy Duck down. It is sick in the head at inception. You have lived through a President that recorded and conspired to destroy another party, Nixon. You've lived through a President that took one trillion of your hard earned money and spent it on an illegal war, Bush. Now you want to give the President the power to do more without contstraint or oversight? Veto it President Obama. Veto it!
Actually the US soldiers are fighting FOR the indefinite detention. Iraqis and Afghanis are fighting them because of detentions, raids, and occupation.
this bill seems to fly in the face of the Constitution and leaves to many questions as to its separation of powers ! this must be addressed and until than a veto maybe necessary ! certainly terrorism needs addressing . but at what cost to the freedom of American citizens and the future of the nation ! if we continue to act to desolve and limit our own freedoms here at home it seems that Al Qaida has already won !
So now congress is legislating executive decisions. While a veto would be disruptive, it appears unavoidable. Congress can't seem to do what is right by the American people on the economy, but they are trying to force their will on the white house in a way that is quite insulting. Very sad for the American public. Vote all the idiots out.
So, you think a president has the right to decide unilaterally that an American citizen can be executed? And Congress is within its rights to "force its will." They are an equal branch of government.
As for voting the idiots out, I agree. Let's start with Obama.
Even the Democrats are against Obama on this one.
......meaning it's all up to Obama to preserve American civil liberties, at least for a few more years. Running on a platform of "I saved you people from a military dictatorship" should work well for him
Not if he vetos it like he says he will. But he says a lot of things....only about half come to pass. He better veto his if he likes his job.
A veto won't matter..... Congress has the 2/3 vote to overturn a veto.
If Congress overrides the veto I suggest you flee your country before they take that right away too. If this abomination becomes law then the America we all knew growing up ceases to exist, it will be no better than any one of its enemies from the last 100 years. In fact it will be so fascist it will make Nazi Germany look like Cuba
Write the President and voice your concern and ask him to veto the bill.
I did.
After reading 1031 and 1032 it is NOT clear if this applies to US citizens.
1031 say it does...1032 say it doesn't.
Throw out the whole section period.
Better yet throw out all of congress...all 535 of them.
How is it congress can bring up and pass something so quickly that will have a negative impact on all America, but cant compromise on the budget?
There's something wrong in Washington and these people are not to be trusted with our liberties.
Mr. Liberalnewsucks, What a pathetic moron with really bad hair you are. If calling Liberals a "Tool" is the best you can come up with, you might just qualify for a job at Fox News. You obviously have no concept of habeas corpus or it's meaning. If you want to live in a police state, I'm sure North Korea can use a few bleach blond peasants.
I think that's supossed to be a picture of Obama. Just more of his IQ level shining thru.
This level of defense spending is an outrage especially with our economy in such dire straits. 600 billion dollars plus for what? Both parties are to blame for this stupid spending. Sufficiency could be had for 300 billion easy. Then take the difference and spend on national infrastructure and new energy development. Our defense spending has become a huge sinkhole and socialism personified for former soldiers (the old revolving door) and defense corporations who also eagerly sell to our enemies.
Again, wrong message to take away. Read it again and then read the post to see why people are so pissed off about this.
Void the US Constitution? Void the Bill of Rights? Override Posse Comitatus and grant the military the unchecked power to arrest, detain, interrogate and even assassinate U.S. citizens with impunity?
Those voting for this bill are treasonist, tyranical idiots!
In the words of Benjamin Frankin: "Those who would give up freedom for security deserve neither".
Which by the vote is just about all of them. Oh well, I guess we just keep replacing everyone of them every couple years till they get it right. Once we throw out all the establishment pols who have been comfortable in their seats, term after term. They'll start to get the message.
Your temp employees until we decide otherwise.
Karl, Very good quote and post ! and oh so true !
The President will veto this as promised.
not for being too small. thats for sure.! We need to spend every dime we get in the us treasury to protect us from those evil drug attics in afghanistan. $665 billion of 1.2 trillion the us treasury takes in. This likely doesn't include all the stuff that goes into defense that is defense related through hokey accounting. I am glad as us citizens that we have our priorities right when it comes to killing people.
Obama 2012 - the end of an error.
GOP RIP 2010-The end of the Grand Old Party
Senate bill 1867 for the 112'th congress.
I have a full copy of the bill pulled off a government site.
Very interesting reading for anyone who really wants to know what is going on with armed forces, pentagon, etc.
However, there is a cobra in the basket, and anyone who has pledged to uphold the constitution of the US should NOT even be considering that portion of the bill. This is the ONLY reason Obama has threatened to veto the bill.
In some vague legelesque language, it basicaly lays out that the Federal Government (MILITARY) can detain and jail ANYONE with no
charges and no trial indefinitely, including American citizens.
I am not one for grand statements of the hang em all kind, but the senators and congressman who put this particular language in the bill, then through procedural voodoo stopped other rational lawmakers from removing this one part of the bill, should possibly be brought up on charges of treason against the Constitution and the American people.