Posted on 12/15/2011 6:23:08 AM PST by kronos77
Less than a month after he threatened to veto terrifying legislation that would cease constitutional rights as we know it, Obama has revoked his warning and plans to authorize a bill allowing indefinite detention and torture of Americans.
After passing in the House of Representatives earlier this year, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 went before the US Senate last week, where it was met with overwhelming approval. In the days before, the Obama administration issued a policy statement on November 17 saying explicitly that the president would veto the bill, as it would challenge “the president’s critical authorities to collect intelligence incapacitate dangerous terrorists and protect the nation.”
Opposition from the White House seemed all but rampant until RT revealed earlier this week that Senator Carl Levin told lawmakers that the legislation was altered because “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”
On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that those last minute changes yielded legislation that would “not challenge the president’s ability to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists and protect the American people,” and therefore “the president’s senior advisers will not recommend a veto.”
Originally the White House said that the administration objected to matters in the bill that applied to detainees. Under the act, Americans could be arrested and held indefinitely in military-run prisons and tortured without charges ever being brought forth, essentially making Guantanamo Bay a threat for every American citizen.
Under the legislation, a literal police state will be installed over the United States. Republican Congressman Ron Paul said earlier this week that “this should be the biggest news going right now,” as the legislation would allow for “literally legalizing martial law.”
(Excerpt) Read more at rt.com ...
amen
I’d trust Russia Today, more than CNN, MSNBC or the New York Times.
Proving only that you don’t follow it that closely.
Zero is at war with the American people.
Those evolutionary steps await us, it will not take long.
The bill is available in pdf on Thomas. I'm sure you've read it. Could you copy and paste for me the sections in their entirety('section' has a meaning') that have your heart all aflutter?
I think the bit about torture is a little overstated but what is not being commented on is that the POTUS with the Military can say who is arrested and who is not. This is the definition of a police state. Obama already has pretty solid control of the officer corp of the military. This law gives him control of who should not be detained.
So now the military can, with these overly broad definitions, go in an arrest someone who just may coinicently be a political opponent of Obama. Maybe a FReeper, because they have ammuniion or weapons or food or a diferent opinion or . . . and it will be up to the POTUS whether they go to GITMO or not.
Does this not cause some of us just a little concern???
Per Drudge:
COMING SOON: AMERICANS IN GITMO...
Bill allows indefinite detention without trial...
Obama ‘demanded law apply to U.S. citizens’...
Even Al Jazeera asks: ‘How did we get here?’
Is this article’s conclusion correct or not?
Did you know that there’s 50 ChiComm divisions hiding in the sagebrush in Texas? Yes, indeed.
And when obuma gives the word, they will jump out and round up all Americans, starting with the 1st Marine Division and 101st Airborne. Shouldn’t be a problem at all.
If I recall correctly, weren’t the Tea Party rally’s referred to a bunch if terrorist? Just saying.
Cite them.
I don’t like the law, but I want good information.
except that Leftist American agitators like Thom Hartmann did not have their own shows on Radio Moscow
Obama the devout Marxist has just been given dictatorial power over every US citizen. How is this not a declaration of war against the American people?
You got that right. Anybody that thinks the GOP isn’t in on this is not paying attention. 286 votes in the House of Rep for this bill yesterday. Thats a lot of republicans. We are all Al Queda now. If the food nazi’s start coming around and you have too much food are they going to take you away to indefinite detention for unamerican terrorist activity? It could get that insane real quick.
For anybody who thinks this will not happen just remember this country has rounded people up before and put them in internment camps. Ask the Japenese how easy it was to round them up.
Every republican who voted for that bill should be voted out of office.
“tortured without charges ever being brought forth, essentially making Guantanamo Bay a threat for every American citizen.”
How many times does this ludicrous charge about torture have to be laid to rest?
I don’t know if you are kidding or not but my fiancee’ is from out west and he was in a gas station in WA and some military pulled up and it was a bunch of Europeans in uniforms. They were training at a nearby US base. My fiancee’ told them they were in the US illegally that our constitution forbids foreign troops on US soil. They started up about how they were just here training etc. He looked on one guy and said “If anything starts up you will be the first one I kill”. Then a bunch of other guys who were standing around joined in. Those troops hit the road real quick lickity split back to the base. I don’t think a bunch of Chicoms will last long duking it out with Texas boys and I sure invite them on down to GA where they will get a real warm welcome.
All can read for themselves. It is confusing, but grants the power to indefinitely detain, but then says that the mandatory provisions requiring detention are not applicable to US Citizens, which begs the question...they are not required, but they still have that option. It builds upon and makes reference to existing laws. It could easily be re-written to exclude US Citizens from the denial of their Constitutional rights.
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.
(a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined—
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.
on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.—The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
(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.
(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.
(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)(1) 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)(2) 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)(1) 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)(4) 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)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.
Biden says the tea party are terrorists.
Rep. Mike Doyle, D-PA says the tea party are terrorists.
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) called tea partiers arsonists.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60421.html
Bill Press agrees with it.
http://www.billpressshow.com/2011/08/03/biden-right-about-tea-party-terrorists/
William Yeomans says that tea partiers are full blown terrorist.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/60202.html
It is not a far stretch to say that with this law, anyone in authority can define the opposition to be a terrorist, and hold them in detention, without the right to contest the original determination or to have a trial.
My daughter has been to Rwanda to study in detail the genocide there, including the political landscape that existed before the genocide occurred.
The other day she said, Dad, the language people are using to define the opposition and to dehumanize them is the same language that was used before the genocide occurred. People were first made to disrespect the opposition, then made to see them as unworthy, then made to seem as not worthy of human kindness and understanding, then made to be a pox to be purged for the betterment of society.
We are not so far away from this as we might think.
Yet Gabrielle Giffords was shot because of this language according to the left, but the left’s invective leads only to justice.
Check out this video on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7mwP5Di5NE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eJrzhvfCw8&feature=watch_response
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.