E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSStory updated 2:47p.m. ET:
Congress neared completion of a massive defense bill Thursday with lawmakers fiercely defending provisions on suspected terrorists against criticism that it would infringe on Americans' constitutional rights.
The Senate was poised to vote on the measure and send it to President Barack Obama for his signature. The bill would authorize $662 billion for military personnel, weapons systems, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and national security programs in the Energy Department for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.
The legislation is $27 billion less than Obama wanted and $43 billion less than Congress gave the Pentagon this year, a reflection of deficit-driven federal budgets, the end of the Iraq war and the drawdown in Afghanistan.
In a rare show of bipartisanship, the House voted 283-136 for the measure late Wednesday. Sen. John McCain, the senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, said Thursday the cooperation was a "little ray of sunshine" in a bitterly divided Washington.
The comment belied a fierce struggle over provisions on suspected terrorists that have pitted the White House against Congress, divided Republicans and Democrats and drawn the wrath of civil rights groups.
The White House initially threatened to veto the legislation but dropped that warning late Wednesday, saying last-minute congressional changes no longer challenge the president's ability to combat terrorism.
Among other elements of the bill, it would:
—Impose tough new penalties on Iran, targeting foreign financial institutions that do business with the country's central bank. The president could waive those penalties if he notifies Congress that it's in the interest of national security.
—Freeze $700 million in funding for Pakistan until the defense secretary provides Congress a report on how Islamabad is countering the threat of improvised explosive devices.
—Require the contractor of the troubled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft program, Lockheed Martin, to cover extra costs on future purchases of the aircraft. Congress is frustrated with delays and cost overruns in the program.
The Pentagon envisions buying 2,443 planes for the Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, but the $1 trillion price could make it the most expensive program in military history. Several U.S. allies want to buy the aircraft as well.
Two provisions in the bill have created the most controversy.
One would require military custody for foreign terrorist suspects linked to al-Qaida or its affiliates and involved in plotting or attacking the United States. The suspects could be transferred to civilian custody for trial, and the president would have final say on determining how the transfer would occur. Under pressure from Obama and his national security team, lawmakers added language that says nothing in the bill may be "construed to affect the existing criminal enforcement and national security authorities of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or any other domestic law enforcement agency with regard to a covered person, regardless whether such covered person is held in military custody."
The attorney general, in consultation with the defense secretary, would decide on whether to try the individual in federal court or by military tribunal. The president could waive the entire requirement based on national security.
The second provision would deny suspected terrorists, including U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention. It reaffirms the post-Sept. 11 authorization for the use of military force that allows indefinite detention of enemy combatants. The provision includes a Senate-passed compromise that says nothing in the legislation may be "construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States."
Conservative Republicans, liberal Democrats and civil rights groups have warned that the provision would allow the government to hold U.S. citizens indefinitely, a point challenged by the bill's sponsors.
"Those who say that we have written into law a new authority to detain American citizens until the end of hostilities are wrong," said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Democrat.
Citing the courts, Levin has repeatedly pointed out that a June 2004 Supreme Court decision, in a case called Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that said U.S. citizens can be detained indefinitely.
"I believe that if an American citizen joins a foreign army or a hostile force like al-Qaida that has declared war and organized a war against us and attacks us, that that person can be captured and detained as an enemy combatant under the law of war," the senator said.
Said McCain: "The language in this bill will not affect any Americans engaging in the pursuits of their constitutional rights."
Agitating for a power-sharing role in battling terrorism, Congress had pushed the bill into an escalating fight over whether to treat suspects as prisoners of war or as criminals.
The Obama administration insists that the military, law enforcement and intelligence officials need flexibility in the campaign against terrorism.
Obama points to his administration's successes in killing Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S.-born radical Islamic cleric. 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.
Leave a Comment:
THIS bill just passed , the President said he will sighn it;
If a American citizen is said to be a suspect member of a-Quida or any affliated organization, they can be seized and imprisoned for life without a trial, without any protections of our Constitution;
A police state has now been created in this Country, your Congress voted for the bill, the provision exempting American Citizens, is over ruled in the later parts of this bill; Congress has lost it's mind, the Senate has lost it's mind, the President has lost his mind;
American's have lost the Constitution.
Specifically, the bill would require that the military take custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates who is involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States.
There is an exemption for U.S. citizens.
Good … no Great job President Obama!
The Republicans trying to sucker President Obama and his administration into signing this law with language attempting to suspend the 4th amendment are attempting a slick attempt to drag President Obama down into the gutter with them.
Again, thanks for President Obama vigilance, if the Republicans responsible for this could have suckered President Obama into signing this as was written and passed by the Congress with the S.187 provisions unchecked; the GOP would have created a jagged dagger to stick into President Obama’s back come election time.
It pleases me to no end to see for first time in a long time a politician and President who not only actually reads what he is signing, but looks further than these knee jerk Republicans proposing bad law, bad legislation, and a terrible attitude towards the US Constitution.
The Republicans responsible for this atrocity called S.187 are willing to sacrifice the Bill of Rights for all US Citizens for a chance at unseating President Obama in 2012.
I am surprised, although I shouldn’t be considering these same GOP-Tea Party individuals have been willing to sacrifice the US and worlds economy for three going on four years … But the Bill of rights?
I support President Obama’s Veto of the entire bill if the language is not corrected, as well say send it back for further Veto if the language is not exactly the way it should be.
President Obama and his administration are on post.
If the Republicans manage to force this upon President Obama, the first US Citizen the president should order arrested by the military is the writer of provision S.187, followed by every Senator, and Congressman who voted for it.
Obama has already said that he will not veto this bill, as is. It allows for indefinite detention of American citizens without rights to attorney or trial.
Prove that wrong, because everyone on the planet except for you and MSNBC seem to believe that. So we are waiting for you to prove that wrong. I sincerely hope that you can. John McCain is a horrible excuse for a human being. Obama is not looking any better.
Hyperionxvii
I completely agree with you that The Indefinite Detention Bill: S.1867, is the most unconstitutional and un-American completely screwed up piece of legislation ever attempted in the history of the United States, period.
What I see in this article is that not only President Obama, but all of his Intelligence, and legal administration do not want it, and are standing up saying so.
The proof will be shown at the over all bills singing into law.
I am saying that if President Obama signs this as it was sent to him, he is signing his own demise in the next election, and I think he see's this as well.
I am not the president, President Obama and only President Obama will be the ultimate judge of this.
The only other way this could pass is if the Congress as a whole forces it through with a over ride, and as I say if they do … the first US Citizens ordered arrested by the President, and held by the military under this law should be the writer of S.1867, and then the rest of the Congress who vote for it, no exceptions.
I personally think that Senator McCain should be tried for treason just for attempting this crap. He is the worst of the worst, followed closely by Lieberman, who thank God says he is retiring.
I am no Obama fan either, but I sure hope he comes through for us on this one. I doubt it though, I have no confidence in the man. I think he will sign it as is, as rumors have it, he has already stated that he will. Let's wait and see, I pray that you are right.
Let me explain; the President said this morning , HE WILL SIGN THE BILL INTO LAW, we are now a police state; it is up to the Supreme court to attempt to stop this madness .
saxon
I have heard this since the bill was passed, that’s why I was cautiously optimistic when MSNBC put this article out.
The proof will be in the signing.
I am biting my tongue, if you have seen some of my other posts in the past about this I have been very agitate about this, as well as tried to support President Obama from the center.
So I will cross my fingers, and wait and see.
You hit the nail on the head saxon. The president wouldnt even need this bill to detain american citizens deemed terrorist, thanks to his executive orders, which even give him the right to torture and even kill american citizens accused or suspected of terrorism, basically this means if you dont agree with our leaders then you will be considered a terrorist, THIS IS ALL A SETUP FOR THE REAL MISSION: TURN AMERICA INTO A POLICE STATE, OR RATHER A COMMUNIST RUSSIA OR EVEN A NATZI GERMANY, THIS TYPE OF TYRANNY HAS BEEN REPEATED THROUGHOUT HISTORY, SLOWLY BUT SURELY TAKE PEOPLES RIGHTS AWAY IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE SO CALLED SECURITY OF ITS CITIZENS....YOU SEE..WHEN U CREATE A THREAT OR TERRORIST ATTACK, U THEN HAVE AN EXCUSE TO TAKE PEOPLES LIBERTIES AND RIGHTS AWAY IN ORDER TO PROTECT THEM FROM TERRORIST!! THE EXACT SAME THING OCCURED IN NAZI GERMANY!!! BUT DONT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT AMERICANS, DO YOUR RESEARCH ON THE NAZIS AND HOW THEY RAN THE SAME OPERATION ON THIER OWN CITIZENS!! THIS IS MORE THAN JUST AN ACT TO DESTROY OUR GREAT CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS, IT IS DOWNRIGHT TYRANNY IN ITS WORST FASHION!! So basically anyone who disagreed with the governments actions would be considered a "home grown terrorist."
*******WAKE UP AMERICA, WE ARE BEING TAKEN FOR FOOLS WHO ARE TOO IGNORANT TO KNOW WHEN TYRANNY IS UPON US**************
"Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
-Benjamin Franklin
LetmeExplain, you are sooooooo wrong. Ron Paul slipped in the ammendment that specifies military detention. Obama didn't want military detention because that means POWs. And that means The Geneva Convention. And that means he can't waterboard them. Thankfully, as a US citizen, we are exempt! They can do whatever the eff they want to us!!!!!
Like McCain said, isn't that just a little "ray of sunshine".
Hey MSN, you left out the part about this bill explicitly repealing Posse Comitatus. That's a pretty big deal too, don't you think? What's the matter, your Corporate Masters tell you not to make a big deal about that one?
For those who don't know what posse comitatatus is, it was a law saying the US military couldn't be deployed in the homeland against it's own citizens. Thankfully, Obama will no longer be troubled by such trivial matters.
Oh yes, this law makes it possible for the President to deploy the Army against US citizens in the US. Surely that was worth at least mentioning?
"What's the matter, your Corporate Masters tell you not to make a big deal about that one?"
Alil Common Sense,
Perfect post. Horrible day.
About a month ago. I warned you about "Indefinite Detentions".
There is also, "Anyone stating a radical change to (US) Government is a Homegrown Domestic Terrorist". As part of the defeated as Unconstitutional H.R.1955 and S.1959 included in President Obama's January 21, 2009 Patriot Acts (plural), that also included extention of President Bush's Patriot Act (singular). One of the significant changes was the legalization of most things considered Illegal under President Bush's Patriot Act (singular), example: the Legalization of the monitoring and censorship of all US Communications, Illegal under President Bush, 100% legal under President Obama.
Then Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, told all of you about this with her, "Anyone Returning from the Wars is a potential Homegrown Domestic Terrorist". Guilty until proven innocent.
Whenever they are doing something like this, Defense Bill, it needs to be a Defense Bill (list of how much is being paid for what) and not some sort of means to "slip something" into US Law or forced into passage as a "Rider". And also NOT used to "clarify" another US Law, you "clarify" that US Law within that US Law.
Also these "Defense Bills" need to be US Military ONLY. Not everything and anything considered as Defense, they should have their own Appropriations, so that their Budgets are not forced into passage.
This is like you going the cashier, with the cashier not you dumping a bunch of stuff into your purchase and then ringing you up and you are required to pay.
Also the US Army Corps of Engineers Domestic Projects, Programs must be separate from the US Military Defense Budget. example: The Funding for the Building, Upgrades, Modifications, etc. of the Levees at New Orleans; the Dredging of US Streams and Rivers; etc., as this is why these were not done before Katrina; the flooding and droughts at the US, etc. after Cuts to the US Defense Budget.
Seems like Common Sense to me, a lost concept at D.C. (Dysfunctional Congress).
Oh, yes, some of you might want to state US NORTHCOM in relation to the US Insurrection Act, instead of stating "US Military", "Posse Comitatus Act" etc., this gives more of the who, what, where, why, etc.. As some of us (US Military) believe that it is not only a violation of your Rights; but is a violation of our Right to not use Deadly Force Against US Citizens or we face Summary Executions, and our families face "indefinite detentions" as possible co conspirators to our Treason (failure to obey an Executive Order).
Bernie Sanders for President 2012 / Out with all who signed this disgusting piece of crap; the greatest threat to our Bill of Rights in all of our History. From Obama on down, each and every one of them red or blue. Try them all for violation of the oaths of office. Never forget! Never give up and Never give in!
I say we drum up support and go get all of these government officials and lock them up until we individually assess all of their past actions.
Anyone who we find that has gone against the people of this nation and sold us out for their own interest or the interest of their donors will be EXECUTED!!!!
WE ARE TIRED OF YOUR GAMES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well maybe not executed but they need to know that we feel very strongly about Our RIGHTS!!!!!!!!
home made jails for these traitors?????
Occupy Congress!
LetMeExplain,
This was a joint venture. Voting For were 48 Democrats, 44 Republicans and 1 Independent. Voting Against were 3 Democrats, 3 Republicans and 1 Independent.
Source: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-218
It was the Obama Administration that requested the removal of a phrase that would have exempted American Citizens from the indefinite detention measures. Check the link below:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10170-obama-admin-pushed-for-indefinite-detention-provision
Regarding the veto, here is a quote from the article:
It was Democratic Senator Carl Levine of Michigan, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee who, in session, pressed the issue of the Obama Administration's request. That was shown on a Youtube video that I saw for myself a few days ago. The video has now been removed by the user, so it says. Has anyone seen a copy of it anywhere else? The public really needs to see it.
Nothing should deny a US citizen, detained on US soil, from access to due process through the civilian judicial system. Nibbling around the edges of that right is as onerous to some of us as nibbling around the edges of the right to bear arms is to others.
The State should never be able to detain its citizens indefinitely and without charges. If we open that door, we are no better than every dictatorship and phony democracy in the rest of the world.
We have just opened that door. Go to any other news source and read about this bill. Try CBS, they are telling the truth. You can now be held indefinitely by the military with no opportunity for trial, no lawyer, no rights, just on suspicion of what might be terrorist activity.
Anita said:
Nothing should deny a US citizen, detained on US soil, from access to due process through the civilian judicial system.
The Constitution of the US has amendments to the constitution, the first ten of which are called the 'Bill of Rights:
Amendment 5: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The operative term here is 'no person'. The Constitution doesn't differentiate between US citizens, lawful residents, illegal aliens, undocumented immigrants, or terrorists. It gives EVERY PERSON due process of law.
Amendment 6: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Being charged with a crime by the American government is a serious thing, therefore the Bill of Rights was written with the idea that an average person should be able to defend himself against charges and implies that the government should have to prove their case. it's also better known as 'innocent until proven guilty' and with the passage of this bill that would change to 'guilty until you prove you're innocent'. How do you do that from behind bars? If they don't tell you what you're being arrested for, how do you know what to defend yourself from? if you aren't given a chance at a trial, how do you prove you're innocent? And if they can hold you indefinitely, they can just wait until you're dead.
This has been gong on for years--a decade now. You think all those people Homeland Security declared 'illegal' actually ARE illegal? There are lots of cases out there where a US citizen has been detained unlawfully, but this one is the most illustrative:
Mr. George Ibarra, 46, was born in Mexico but was raised since infancy in Arizona. In his late 20s he enlisted in the Marines and served three years on active duty, including time in Iraq, before being honorably discharged. On February 23, 2011 Department of Justice adjudicator Richard Phelps ruled in Eloy, Arizona that George Ibarra had by a preponderance of the evidence proven that he is indeed a citizen of the United States. Rather than apologize to Mr. Ibarra for previously wrongfully detaining him, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is holding Mr. Ibarra in solitary confinement at the Eloy Detention Center, in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution and a memorandum requiring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to release anyone with "probative evidence" of U.S. citizenship.
Mr. Ibarra served honorably in our armed services. He was detained as an illegal but proved to a judge that he was a citizen through military records and a mountain of paperwork. And still ICE/DHS didn't let him go; instead they put him in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT and tried to keep anyone from finding out. This is a clear violation of his rights!
Indefinite detention without charge or trial has been going on for years now, but Homeland Security tested it on a small portion of our country's population; the immigrants, legal or otherwise, and anyone they could justify calling an 'illegal'. When there were no mass protests about violations of constitutional rights, they decided to expand this to include EVERYONE.
Everyone should write to their congressman/woman/Representative/Senator about this. Senator Carl Levin (D) and Senator John McCain (R) wrote it, allegedly in secret, and it was sponsored into the House of Representatives by Representative Howard McKeon (R).
WE AS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE A SAY IN WHAT LAWS ARE PLACED OVER US THAT OUR GOVERNMENT SAYS WE SHOULD FOLLOW!!!!
I agree with your interpretation of person meaning any person, but that usually opens a whole host of conspiracy theorists and reactionaries who get completely off topic. I too think the constitution and the Declaration of Independence speak to the rights of all, not just US citizens, but since the legislation in question target specifically citizens, I limited my comments to that.
Unfortunately, as a republic, we elect our representative to do just that: Represent us. In this case, any congressman or senator who votes for this bill with this provision, should be voted out of office at the next opportunity since they clearly do not represent the interests of the citizens.
All of you do realize that by allowing the Illegal Aliens (Loyal Citizens of another Nation) to remain or have "US Rights" just gives them (US Politicians) an excuse to "Amend","Curtail" all US Citizens Rights.
Personally, I do not believe I want to live at another Mexico, in that the Citizens cannot legally own any weapons, so only the Drug Lords and criminals have weapons, the Citizens are the sheep to be slaughtered. Think about taking a knife or club and facing fully automatic weapons, in the event the US turns into a Police State or Totalitarian Government (almost there already).
Just a thought, smart phone tracking, gps vehicle tracking; current upcoming use of RQs within the US (FAA currently working on that, December 2011). Who is to say that MQs will not be used. example: "Terrorist" drives vehicle with North Star, gets out with smart phone. MQ releases a small warhead missile from range out of sight, terminal guidance locks in on smart phone, one dead "Terrorist". "Terrorist" as anyone defined by the US Government. Works pretty well here at Afghanistan. At first I thought it was pretty stupid to install cellular phone towers and repeaters here, with the enemy using cellular phones to warn each other of our movements.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIzITqBcRnY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddi2TBnzdPo
The best way to rebel if they do this is to discontinue your relationship with this government and STOP PAYING TAXES TO SUPPORT IT!!!!!
Man it hurts to grow up and see all of the wrong that is being done around the world and how money has taken over this planet and the majority of those who inhabit it.
Sad really, for those of us who see what is going on and can't do anything about it while we are constantly being attacked by those who lead us!!!!!!
Or how greed in this country has all of those at the top whho are willing to poison or trick consumers in order to make a buck or even kill someone for it!!!!!
Time for those in the Armed Services to Start Revolting Against their Higher Ups!!!!!!
TIME TO TAKE THIS COUNTRY BACK BABY!!!!!!!!!
right on David the cell phone towers are a weapon against the people they just can't see it
Members of congress who serve multinational corporations, allow corporate lobbyists to write legislation for them and give away billions of dollars to hostile foreign countries like Pakistan and Egypt should be held indefinitely as enemy combatants. If anyone is an enemy of the state it's the 112th congress of the USA.
@ wildcatwest
I agree with you 100%
Problem is as I see it : is that congress has already exempted it self from Prosecution from any and all crimes it commits.
bob
Actually any law/amendment/bill/etc that weakens or goes against the US Constitution is illegal and not valid.
As far as your vets comment:Veterans of foreign wars are automatically put on a terror watch list.
So I am sure most of those who are aware of this will stay true to their Oath to support and defend the US Constitution above anything else.
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
"I, ____— (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of ____— do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."
Oliver Ellsworth, Connecticut Convention, stated clearly: "This Constitution defines the extent of the powers of the general government. If the general legislature, Congress should at any time overleap their limits, if the United States go beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void". (This means the illegal, un Constitutional law/etc they made really does not exist, no matter what pretentious validity they put upon it while being a domestic enemy not yet removed from office.)
The Supreme Courts take on this:
The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism." The Supreme Court of the United States
Basically says it is also illegal, and that those who are doing it are working against the USA/Constitution. That they cannot suspend our Rights (Patriot Act, prolonged detention, precrime, the searches without warrants & TSA searches, search and seizures, etc. None of that is legal or valid.
Fight against the domestic enemies within the three branches of our government who are working to destroy America, take away our Rights, do away with the US Constitution.
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.
The domestic enemies within our government can be fired (impeached) and need to be. How, you might ask? Let me walk you through it.
1) The three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the 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.
2) The wording of the Presidential Oath established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure.
3) They then must keep that Oath they took while in the office or position they currently occupy to be able to stay in that position.
4) 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 (which we have not done).
5) They also make themselves Domestic Enemies of the USA and are prosecutable with charges of impeachment and censure, and other things.
Lockheed Martin has my approval to build 500 more of the F-22 'Raptors instead of the F-35 'Lightning. Select from our universities and colleges some of the best minds and physically gifted "MEN" for an all Special Ops Branch (est 100,000) to be on the ALWAYS READY for the world.
and yet a bill that eats up 20% of the federal budget passes with no hand wringing from the right aboput paying for stuff...or complaints about waste fraud or abuse...so only programs that help people have waste but ones that provide welfare to defense contractors are hunky dory?
so far from the comments, no one understands what this law means;
It means our Government may detain any American citizen, it deems may be a member of any terrorist organization; and the Government in secret determines who and what is a terrorist organization; folks this is really scary stuff !
what if they determine that the Tea party, ows, Nra, citizens taxpayer union are all terrorist organization.
Exactly! MSNBC are lying. There is no exemption for US Citizens from this.
saxon said:
what if they determine that the Tea party, ows, Nra, citizens taxpayer union are all terrorist organization.
Here's Homeland Security's list of what constitutes terrorism:
Alternative media
Anarchist extremism
Animal rights extremism
Anti-abortion extremism
Anti-immigration extremism
Anti-technology extremism
Aryan prison gangs
Black bloc
Black nationalism
Black power
Black separatism
Christian Identity movement
Cuban independence extremism
Decentralized terror movement
Denial-of-service attacks
Direct action (including lawful acts of civil disobedience; think Rosa Parks refusing to give up her bus seat being arrested as a terrorist)
Environmental extremism
Ethnic extremism
Extremist groups
Green anarchism
Hacktivism (technology-enabled social/political activism)
Hate groups
Jewish extremism
Leaderless resistance
Left-wing extremism
Lone terrorists
Mexican separatists
Militia Movements (including conspiracy theorists)
Neo-Nazis
Patriot Movement
Phineas Priesthood
Primary targeting(directly supporting/funding terrorists)
Puerto Rican independence extremists
Radical Norse mysticism practitioners
Racialists
Right-wing extremists
Single-issue/multiple issue extremist groups
Skinheads whose ‘dress may include shaved head/short hair, jeans, thin suspenders, combat boots or Doc Martens and a bomber jacket’
Sovereign citizen movement
Tax resistance movement
Violent anti-war extremism
Violent religious sects (includes those who stockpile food and weapons)
White Nationalists
White Power advocates
White Supremacists
Seriously, when was the last time someone blew up a government building 'in the name of the Norse god Odin'?
You know who I DON'T see on this list? Child molesters and violent child sexual predators. If we define terrorist as someone who uses fear to force someone else to do something they wouldn't do otherwise, then a child sexual predator is in my book a TERRORIST and should be on this list. But they should still receive a trial and lawyer!
There is no exemption for America Citizens in this bill. MSNBC, why do you lie!
The US is now a police state, we are no longer a free country.
Sadly its been this way since the passage of the Patriot Act.
yep, the patriot act basically says the same thing. you can be detained indefinately without counsel,charges or a trial merely on the suspicion that you have ties to terrorists or terrorist organizations.America is now officially a police state controlled by the 1%
It is time for us to lay down our political differences, right, left, conservative, liberal, it doesn't matter right now. We have to unite to rid ourselves of these tyrants and restore our rights and freedoms.
This, combined with SOPA will make China look free and Inviting.
Nothing short of a new revolution will ever turn this around. Once a government gets this kind of power it will never voluntarily surrender that power back to it's people.
Of course, the next logical thing for tyrants to attack is our internet freedoms.
Hyperion:
Alternative media and 'technology-enabled social/polical activism' are on the list of terroristic indicators. See above list in post 5.3.
I saw it, Amanda. That list pretty much cover, well, everyone, except for maybe senior citizen bowling leagues. But I am sure they will amend it soon to cover them also.
I'll be happier when it covers violent child sexual predators too!
Chaz, we are NOT revolting. We are DEFENDING our Constitution, our Country, our Rights from domestic enemies within our govenrment who are destroying OUR Constitution, our nation, and going against American citizens.
Understand?
Stay Safe and Detention Free!
Every other news site, including CBS news have already reported that American Citizens can now be held indefinitely without trial on mere suspicion. MSNBC, you should be ashamed of yourself for supporting this and lying about it!
Shhh, don't let them hear you complain! According to the DoD, Protest is a low-level form of terrorism!
Arrest them as domestic enemies, hold them until we replace the domestic enemies within the judicial branch. Prosecute them.
The corrupt Military Industrial Complex rolls along quite nicely thank you. I believe in a strong military defense but military contractors buy and write the policy that Congress passes to line their own pockets. The system is corrupt to the core and is no longer about defending our nation. They wave the flag and the money rolls in.
This is a national disgrace.
What is being "conserved"when Congress gives military spending a 1% boost? It should be cut in half. This spending bill has everything to do with porkbarrel politics and NOTHING to do national security.
No wonder we are bleeding red ink.
dubina. Yes indeed. Unfortunately, defense spending has grown and will continue to grow. It is like a cancer that has metastisized. No congressman wants to reduce jobs in their own districts.
Unfortunately, we have troops that are equipted with all the latest gear who are frustrated by some ragtag group running around in their robes and sandals with AK-47s. All the defense spending for new weaponry is just a waste of time and money. The only good thing that can be said for our defense spending is the income we derive from selling it to the rest of the world, dictators included!
Vote for Ron Paul in 2012, or just bend over and shut up.
I agree. He's the only one speaking the truth of what must be done to turn the country around.
There wil be another option soon: Rocky Anderson, former Mayor of Salt Lake City, a Progressive, announced he is going to make a bid for the presidency. His party name: The Justice Party.
Ron Paul wants to demolish social security, medicare. Rocky Anderson has progressive values:
millions of jobs they generate
SOPA will shut down any website the Government feels like, and this will silently make people the governement doesnt like "dissapear"
Thank god for the 2nd amendment, and no, you cant hide out with me.
Nothing but jack booted thugs running the country now. Dissent will no longer be tolerated.
The article said this bill will create jobs in congressmans districts!? I thought republicans always said the Government never created jobs.
Oh well, geez, I mean if it creates a few more government jobs, then I guess it's ok if it takes away our protection from unconstitutional detainment by a tyrannical government.
Just keep playing the blue team, red team game while they strip all of our rights away.
The illusion of choice between the two political parties has proven to be very effective for the government and those who own it.
Its funny that people dont see it.
People begin to revolt against the true owners of capitol hill, 3 months later The president signs a bill into law to detain pretty much anyone without trial, against all party and personal ideals.
Sure, TOTAL coincidence.
Are you guys going to move out of the country then ?
Royalstar:
Absolutely not.
As an immigrant (legally adopted as an infant, only declared illegal because ICE lost my adoption paperwork 18 years after the adoption, and a now-naturalized citizen, this is my home and I will defend it even from the enemy within if need be.
Good for you Amanda. Rock on.
There needs to be a serious revolt against this by ALL citizens, NOW! Forget your red, blue team game for a minute and open your eyes people. This is the most serious threat this country has faced in our lifetime. The terrorists are nothing compared to this threat by our own government.
Hyper, does this mean your going to move out of the country? I mean, since you might be put in jail on some charge? Just askin.
I agree, we need to do whatever it takes to combat this defense bill.We need a full on protest at the halls of congress.We need to keep the pressure on until the congressmen that wrote this bill and the ones who voted for it are dealt with.What good is the oath they took.They need to be held accountable for their actions.We can't keep letting our rights be taken away in the name of terrorism.I have a suspicion that 911 just help our government to further push thru their secret agenda.I think that the government will ultimately lose in the long run.Wake up America,We need support at the top,that is why you all need to vote Ron Paul 2012.
clearly this is unconstitutional and some lawyers with some balls should challenge this in the supreme court.
Hyperionxvii, we are not revolting. WE ARE DEFENDING OUR NATION, OUR CONSTITUTION, OUR FREEDOM, AND OUR WAY OF LIFE FROM THE DOMESTIC ENEMIES WITHIN OUR GOVERNMENT.
Understand? If not, read below and then understand.
They have broken their Oath to support and defend the US Constitution. The POTUS broke his Oath (long ago actually) to "preserve, protect, and defend the US Constitution (which he took twice). They means they can be fired (impeached).
All laws/amendments/bill/etc that weaken or go against the US Constitution now (or in the past) are not legal.
Again, We do not need to revolt, What we need to do is to protect Our Constitution, Our government, Our way of life from the domestic enemies within the three branches of our government. It is time to take back and protect our country from the Domestic Enemies within it.
The Constitution was formed, among other purposes, to make the People's liberties secure - secure not only against foreign attack but from oppression by the American People's own government. Our forefathers set specific limits upon the national government and upon the States, and reserved to the People all powers that they did not grant. The Ninth Amendment declares: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." This means they have NO legal way to take our rights away from us without destroying the US Constitution.
The first law statute of the United States of America, enacted in the first session of the First Congress on 1 June 1789, was Statute 1, Chapter 1: an act to regulate the time and manner of administering certain oaths, which established the oath required by civil and military officials to support the Constitution.
The wording of the Presidential Oath was already established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all other Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure.
The three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the 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. Once given, the Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge.
"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. They are also those who support those in action, or by inaction; vote, voice, money, etc who are going against or trying to weaken the US Constitution and the Peoples written guarantee of those Rights."
1) The three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the 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.
2) The wording of the Presidential Oath established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure.
3) They then must keep that Oath they took while in the office or position they currently occupy to be able to stay in that position.
4) 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 (which we have not done).
5) They also make themselves Domestic Enemies of the USA and are prosecutable with charges of impeachment and censure, and other things.
Oliver Ellsworth, Connecticut Convention, stated clearly: "This Constitution defines the extent of the powers of the general government. If the general legislature, Congress should at any time overleap their limits, if the United States go beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void".
(This means that any illegal, un Constitutional law/etc they made really is NOT valid, no matter what pretentious "legality" they put upon it while being a domestic enemy not yet removed from office.)
The Supreme Courts take on this: The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism." The Supreme Court of the United States
Basically says it is also illegal, and that those who are doing it are working against the USA/Constitution. That they cannot suspend our Rights (Patriot Act, prolonged detention, precrime, the searches without warrants & TSA searches, search and seizures, etc.). None of that is legal or valid.
I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. James Madison
Which is happening here now. So we need to fight the domestic enemies and prosecute them, or WE will be the ones to lose our freedom, and giver our country away.
By the way, the POTUS swears to: "Preserve, Protect, and Defend the US Constitution".
Can you show me where both Obama has done that? The Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasion of leaving office or discharge.
NBCForrest,
"I never got any complaints". Assistant Commandant at Aushwitz, 11/01/1964
Understand?
Just for information
The following are 30 signs that the United States of America is being turned into a giant prison....
#1 A new bill that is going through the U.S. Senate would allow the U.S. military to arrest American citizens and hold them indefinitely without trial. This new law was recently discussed in an article posted on the website of the New American....
In what may be a tale too bizarre to be believed by millions of Americans, the U.S. Senate appears ready to pass a bill that will designate the entire earth, including the United States and its territories, one all-encompassing “battlefield” in the global “war on terror” and authorize the detention of Americans suspected of terrorist ties indefinitely and without trial or even charges being filed that would necessitate a trial.
U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham is a big supporter of the bill, and he says that it would "basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield".
According to the PPJ Gazette, the following are three things that this new law would do....
1) Explicitly authorize the federal government to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others picked up inside and outside the United 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.
#2 U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman is asking Google to install a "terrorist button" on all Blogger.com blogs so that readers can easily flag "terrorist content" for authorities.
#3 Most Americans have no idea how sophisticated the "Big Brother" prison grid has become. For example, in Washington D.C. the movements of every single car are tracked using automated license plate readers (ALPRs). The following comes from a recent Washington Post article....
More than 250 cameras in the District and its suburbs scan license plates in real time, helping police pinpoint stolen cars and fleeing killers. But the program quietly has expanded beyond what anyone had imagined even a few years ago.
With virtually no public debate, police agencies have begun storing the information from the cameras, building databases that document the travels of millions of vehicles.
Nowhere is that more prevalent than in the District, which has more than one plate-reader per square mile, the highest concentration in the nation. Police in the Washington suburbs have dozens of them as well, and local agencies plan to add many more in coming months, creating a comprehensive dragnet that will include all the approaches into the District.
#4 In some American schools, RFID chips are now being used to monitor the attendance and movements of children while they are at school. The following is how one article recently described a program that has just been instituted at a preschool in California.... Upon arriving in the morning, according to the Associated Press, each student at the CCC-George Miller preschool will don a jersey with a stitched in RFID chip. As the kids go about the business of learning, sensors in the school will record their movements, collecting attendance for both classes and meals. Officials from the school have claimed they're only recording information they're required to provide while receiving federal funds for their Headstart program.
#5 Increasingly, incidents of misbehavior at many U.S. schools are being treated as very serious crimes. For example, when a little girl kissed a little boy at one Florida elementary school recently, it was considered to be a "possible sex crime" and the police were called out.
#6 But what happened to one very young student in Stockton, California earlier this year was even worse....
Earlier this year, a Stockton student was handcuffed with zip ties on his hands and feet, forced to go to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and was charged with battery on a police officer. That student was 5 years old.
#7 In the United States today, police are trained to respond to even the smallest crimes with extreme physical force. For example, one grandfather in Arizona was recently filmed laying unconscious in a pool of his own blood after police rammed his head into the flood inside a Wal-Mart on Black Friday night. It was thought that he was shoplifting, but it turns out that he says that he was just trying to tuck a video game away to pick up his grandson to keep him safe, and so other crazed shoppers would not grab it out of his hand.
#8 Did you know that the government actually sets up fake cell phone towers that can intercept your cell phone calls? The following is how a recent Wired article described these "stingrays"....
You make a call on your cellphone thinking the only thing standing between you and the recipient of your call is your carrier’s cellphone tower. In fact, that tower your phone is connecting to just might be a boobytrap set up by law enforcement to ensnare your phone signals and maybe even the content of your calls.
So-called stingrays are one of the new high-tech tools that authorities are using to track and identify you. The devices, about the size of a suitcase, spoof a legitimate cellphone tower in order to trick nearby cellphones and other wireless communication devices into connecting to the tower, as they would to a real cellphone tower.
The government maintains that the stingrays don’t violate Fourth Amendment rights, since Americans don’t have a legitimate expectation of privacy for data sent from their mobile phones and other wireless devices to a cell tower.
#9 U.S. border agents are allowed by law to search any laptop being brought into the United States without even needing a
....and there's nothing any of you can or will do about it except complain about it in some blog, those in power know we are a nation of sheep.
Power to the Sheeple!
Benf-
Write about it. Tell everyone about it. Post it everywhere. Spread the word. Find out who your Senator/Representative is and write letters. Let's start another Occupy movement, but have it be against this law and those who wrote it and put it in place.
To all of you who claim this bill is part of the US getting prepared to put millions of Americans in FEMA concentration camps, I ask you this: if every kid learns in school that Hitler was one of the most evil people to ever live because he and his party rounded up innocent people and sent them to die in camps, where will the government find enough people willing to do the same in the US?
It takes a lot of manpower to do what you people are predicting. Where is that going to come from? I'm not American, but I know if I was asked to participate in genocide or take a bullet in the head I would choose the bullet. I can only hope there are many more out there who share this view.
papag-3094648
I'm with you all the way.!
papag:
This allows the US military to arrest and detain anyone suspected of terrorism against the US or its allies, on American soil or off. Those solders returning from Iraq are never going to see the unemployment line; they're gong to be busy detaining 'terrorists' here at home and at military bases/prisons abroad.
I read a post from the father of a Marine who asked his son if he were to be told to arrest an American citizen, would he do it? That Marine's answer was no,he would choose honor over obedience to orders.
But what if his family was threatened, what if they threatened to arrest his father for speaking out against this law if he didn't arrest the person he was told? Would he still refuse the order with his family in the balance?
The minute such coercion is used against the soldiers they will revolt. They are part of the strongest military in the world, and, assuming at least half (but hopefully more) are good people, they will rise up against tyranny. They will fight alongside the millions of other Americans who truly value freedom and they will not be defeated. All throughout history, forces of good eventually prevail over forces of evil. Always. This time will be no different
Sounds like Obama and his thugs are channeling Franklin Roosevelt...
No it doesn't. A couple of M1 tanks and Apache helicopters backing up the already militarized police force. It should go over pretty easy.
People don't have to know whats really going on to get them to do there bidding. It's been going on now for some time. But rest assured there are plenty out there, that are evil enough to do it, knowing whats really going on.
I would too, but sadly I don't believe it.
How many law enforcement or military, inspite of swearing to defend the US Constitution, "just follow orders" because they came from someone above them? They are trained to follow orders.
How many people in a job follow an order that they know is wrong? Lie about or help setup someone they work with for a promotion?
Most of the German people did not want what happened to happen, but they followed orders, then they knew what would happen to them if they disobeyed. It is a difficult decision, but people protect themselves by doing bad things all the time.
600 or so Billion dollars - of which, as in the past several ( to more than several ) years the Pentagon will not be able to account for the disbursement of 20% to 30% of this figure. The fact that our congress supports this without any demands in regards professional accounting practices and accountability is a direct reflection on their claims to sincerity in terms of fiscal responsibility. It is obviously a highway to misappropriation and all that that entails. No wonder we are in the mess we are in - they lack the responsibility/guts ( or perhaps it is self service ) to at least even try to give the appearance of responsible national management. There is not a household ( or only a few ) in the US that can afford to function in such an irresponsible fashion.
It will be done using deception and propaganda to manipulate public opinion against those whose rights are being violated. Just like now, this is only the beginning.
Word of advice...dont make uncle Sam mad (aka : not paying your taxes) or you might be seen as a terrorist and be jailed till you do....whats sad is that this is now legal (untill the SCOTUS) laughs at it and take turns pissing on it.
Apparently a law has now been passed to make something legal that has been done illegally for sometime now. I will not vote for any of my representatives that voted in favor of this bill. I hope everyone follows suit and when elections roll around again I intend to remind as many people as I can about this attack on american citizens. Unless a more direct approach is made at these horrible traitor politicians then this is the only weapon we have.
Senators who voted against it:
Thomas Coburn, Oklahoma, Republican
Thomas Harkin, Iowa, Democrat
Mike Lee, Utah, Republican
Jeff Merkley, Oregon, Democrat
Rand Paul, Kentucky, Republican
Bernard Sanders, Vermont, Independent
Ron Wyden, Oregon, Democrat
Representatives who voted against it:
Gary Ackerman, D; Justin Amash, R; Tammy Baldwin, D; Karen Bass, D; Xavier Becerra, D; Howard Berman, D: Earl Blumenauer, D; Bruce Braley, D; John Campbell, R; Lois Capps, D; Michal Capuano, D: Jason Chaffetz, R; Judy Chu, D; David Cicilline, D; Hansen Clarke, D; William Clay, D; Emmanuel Cleaver, D; James Clyburn, D; Steve Cohen, D; John Conyers, D; Joseph Crowley, D; Danny Davis, D; Peter DiFazio, D; Diana DeGette, D; Rosa DeLauro, D; Michael Doyle, D; John Duncan, R; Donna Edwards, D; Keith Ellison, Danna Eshoo, Sam Farr, D; Chaka Fattah, D; Barney Frank, D; Marcia Fudge, D; Raul Grijalva, D; Luis Gutierrez, D; James Himes, D; Maurice Hinchey, D; Mazie Hirono, D; Rush Holt, D; Michel Honda, D; William Keating, D; Dennis Kucinich, D; John Larson, D; Barbara Lee, D; John Lewis, D; Zoe Lofgren, D; Ben Lujan, D; Stephen Lynch, D; Carolyn Maloney, D; Edward Markey, D; Doris Matsui, D; Tom McClintock, R; Betty McCollum, D; James McDermott, D; James McGovern, D; Michael Michaud, D; George Miller, D; Gwen Moore, D; Christopher Murphy, D; Jerrold Nadler, D; Grace Napolitano, D; Richard Neal D; Frank Pallone, D; Edward Pastor, D; Ronald Paul, R; Chellie Pingee, D; Jared Polis, D; David Price, D; Mike Gigley, D; Charles Rangel, D; Cedric Richmond, D; Lucille Roybal-Allard, D; Bobby Rush, D; John Sarbanes, D; Janice Schakowsky, D; Kurt Schrader, D; Jose Serrano, D; Brad Sherman, D; Louise Slaughter, D; Jackie Speier, D; Fortney Stark, D; Bennie Thompson, D; Michael Thompson, D; John Tierney, D; Paul Tonko, D; Christopher Van Hollen, D; Nydia Velasquez, D; Maxine Waters, D; Melvin Watt, D; Henry Wayman, D; Anthony Weiner, D; Peter Welch, D; Lynn Woolsey, D; David Wu, D; John Yarmuth, D.
This may be one of the darkest days for the Constitution...I am sure that Jefferson is rolling over in disgust.
Ask yourself this question...
Why does the Federal Government need a provision to detain an American citizen in MILITARY custody without due process indefinitely?
Once you start to put answers to that question, you should all be scared.
I take it your alluding to the formation of the Fourth Reich.....see my above post #16
If that is in fact the government's plan and they decide now is the time to put it in place then get ready for an armed revolution the likes of which this world has never seen. Unlike those in the Capitol, there are many good people serving in the military who believe in the fundamental freedoms enshrined in Constitution. Those brave men and women will not allow such a thing to happen.
If the Fourth Reich is coming I'm sure the powers-that-be are watching these boards and I am now on the terrorist list. To that I say: GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH
royalstar05,
I might move out of the country. What has that got to do with this? You think because I want to stand up to tyranny, that the only solution is moving out of the country? What are you talking about? That seems like an odd comment, with no real meaning. Is that the only thing you have to say?
You know exactly what i'm talking about smartass. Just keep bitching about everything. Hey, if you dont like living here and you hate everyone and everything. Move. You bitch on a blog page but you will do nothing else but spread hate and try to scare people.
Sounds like you are the one full of hate. All I am trying to do is stand up for the rights of all citizens of this country and encourage everyone to be aware and get involved. Apparently you have a problem with that. Why?
Trying to scare people? Really? By telling the truth? Well, just stick your head in the sand and keep it there. I will keep speaking freely, because that it what freedom of speech is. Apparently, you are against freedom of speech. Why is that?
The thing is, everyone doesnt agree with you. Stop being a know it all. Truth, yeah right, you are a laugh riot. Keep hiding behind your so called truth. Like i said, move if you think the U.S. is SO BAD. Later moron.
A lot of people apparently do agree with me, thank God. For some reason, you seem to only attack me, because I criticized one of your post. However I never personally attacked you, I am of higher character than that. I care about the country, maybe you only care about blue team, red team rhetoric. Suit yourself.
The law hasnt even been passed yet and people like you have tanks rolling down every main street in america already. Even if it does get passed the ole U.S.of A will look the same in 20 years so keep your shirt on. Relax, and go outside and do something. Maybe take a cocktail with you. But like i said , if you hate it here, leave.
We would like it if you leave royal.
Don’t be confused by anyone claiming that the indefinite detention legislation does not apply to American citizens. It does. There is an exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032 of the bill), but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1031 of the bill). So, the result is that, under the bill, the military has the power to indefinitely imprison American citizens, but it does not have to use its power unless ordered to do so.
Obama specifically requested these provisions, a blatant violation of the Constitution. He should be impeached for treason along with every congressperson who voted for it. The greatest threat to our country has just revealed itself.
I think he along with every Nazi that voted for this are naive about the intellectual capacity of Americans.
There are enough of you who have not forgotten the lessons of McCarthyism and Nazism. Their are enough members of the military who will not be fooled into brutalizing their fellow citizens because they have been labeled terrorists by the government. There is still enough common sense as well as a sense of right and wrong left in the American psyche to oppose such radical measures. At least I sure hope there is, because otherwise your country as you know it is doomed.
You say you want a revolution?
papag, This is not a revolution, this is defending our country, our Constitution, our people from the domestic enemeis within the three branches of our government.
They want to destroy our Constitution, our way of life, our country, even our citizens (who else they going to put into those detention camps?)
So We the people.. are defending from the enemies within our country.
No charges need to be filed with any agency.
No trial to determine guilt.
Indefnite detention in Military prison.
So, how would anyone know whether the 'suspect' really was a terrorist or not?
You won't know, and even asking might get the interested person arrested.
Americans, get ready to enter a new era where soldiers can roll up to your house in the middle of the night, remove whomever they want, and you might never see them again.
Merry Phucking Christmas
As I already said, I believe there are enough good men and women serving in the military who will refuse to treat their fellow citizens like that. There are enough of them that, unlike the fascists in the Capitol, truly believe in everyone's right to the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. There will be a total armed revolution in America before there is a total police state.
I agree, however...
The problem papag is that there are plenty of military people who WOULD follow these orders.
Sound familiar...just following orders?
Exactly. Now, people may just disappear just like political dissidents do in China, and no one will know anything about it, or have any way to help the person. This basically destroys the basic foundation of individual rights in this country.
Hyperion17
Well said, consise and informative.
Shreds several Constitutional Ammendments to pieces.
DionysusOmega - I know there will be those who would follow these orders, but the fact that there are also a significant number of soldiers who would not leads me to believe America wil be embroiled in a revolution or another civil war before it ever becomes the Fourth Reich
pagag-3094648,
You are correct. If you want to see some of them, just go through a US entry port at any airport. They are wearing black and it have the letters DHS on their uniforms.
Dionysus Omega said:
Shreds several Constitutional Ammendments to pieces.
It shreds more than half of our Bill Of Rights!!!!!!!
Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Deeming ‘alternative media’ as ‘terroristic’ abridges our freedom of speech and press. DHS’s ‘direct action’ clause, which includes ‘lawful acts of civil disobedience’ infringes on our right to express a grievance with the government—Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus back in the 60’s was an act of civil disobedience. If she were to do that today under this law she could be arrested as a terrorist.
Amendment 2: A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
In the above list of terrorist activity indicators is the listing that says militia movements which is a clear direct violation of the 2nd Amendment.
Amendment 4: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This bill says people can be detained upon suspicion of terrorism without charge or trial. Amendment 4 says no warrants shall issue without probable cause, so if you are detaining someone without charge then you don’t have a warrant. Ergo, this is a violation of the 4th amendment.
Amendment 5: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
I would say terrorism classifies and an ‘infamous’ crime. Yes, according to this Amendment someone can be held to answer for it without a Grand Jury indictment ‘in time of war or public danger’, but while we have called the current conflict the ‘war on terror’, Congress has not actually formally pronounced a declaration of war, therefore holding someone without indictment for suspected terrorism violates that clause of the 5th amendment. Also, as the amendment says the person shall not be held without due process of law, holding someone without charge or trial is a clear violation of the 5th.
Amendment 6: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Detaining someone indefinitely without charge or trial violates this whole Amendment for all the reasons specified in Amendments 4 and 5.
Amendment 8: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Interrogation by its definition implies cruel or unusual. In order to ascertain whether a person is detainable, the detaining authority needs to question the individual but this bill needs very, VERY strict definitions of what constitutes ‘interrogation’ and how far the interrogator can go. One only needs to look at Abu Ghraib to see how this could go very wrong very quickly.
(In case you all are wondering where all these cut-and-pastes are coming from, I spent last weekend writing this and mailing out copies to every Congressman in my state.)
Here's the text of the bill as it was originally written by John McCain and Carl Levin; I don't know if we're going to see the final text of the bill until it's passed, though I HOPE we will.
Subtitle D—Detainee Matters
4 SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.
(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(e) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.—The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of subsection (b)(2).
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
SEC. 1032
(c) IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.
8 (2) ELEMENTS.—The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:
(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.
(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection(a) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.
(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation session which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing session.
(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection(a) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.
(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.
(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.
Here are my objections to this as it was written ( would be VERY interested in seeing what has changed from the above version):
The Constitution of the US has amendments to the constitution, the first ten of which are called the 'Bill of Rights:
Amendment 5: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The operative term here is 'no person'. The Constitution doesn't differentiate between US citizens, lawful residents, illegal aliens, undocumented immigrants, or terrorists. It gives EVERY PERSON due process of law.
Amendment 6: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Being charged with a crime by the American government is a serious thing, therefore the Bill of rights was written with the idea that an average person should be able to defend himself against charges and implies that the government should have to prove their case. it's also better known as 'innocent until proven guilty' and with the passage of this bill that would change to 'guilty until you prove you're innocent'. How do you do that from behind bars? If they don't tell you what you're being arrested for, how do you know what to defend yourself from? if you aren't given a chance at a trial, how do you prove you're innocent? And if they can hold you indefinitely, they can just wait until you're dead.
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
Now while this may look on the surface like it doesn't apply to US Citizens, pay close attention to the wording. It says 'the requirement to detain doesn't extend to US citizens', but it says nothing about the military or government choosing to do so. There is no requirement, it basically leaves it up to an as-yet-undetermined agency to choose whether they want to do so or not.
Sec 032, Subsection A says the President has to determine who would be authorized to make the decision to detain these suspected terrorists. Wait a minute, they’ve passed a law and they don’t even know who’s going to be able to make that determination yet? Shouldn’t that be decided BEFORE you pass a law?
Subsection B says they don’t have to determine if someone can be detained until they interrogate the person, and the determination can be made during the interrogation. An interrogation session on anyone suspected of terrorism, citizen or not. I can't be the only one who sees something wrong with that.
You are correct in your interpretation.
And it is SOOOOOOO wrong.
Treasonous!
How to destroy the United States:
Lesson One: Force US officials to constantly maintain that the end justifies the means until they have forsaken their founding principles and usurped their own laws to the point of rendering them meaningless.
Lesson Two: Undermine the arrogant idea that US law is designed to be universal and applicable to all human beings. Force the US to selectively apply its laws only to its own citizens and to the exclusion of others.