[marktwain]

Weird how she focuses on the mild hazing of Abu Ghraib instead of domestic atrocities like Waco and Ruby Ridge. But then, the left has never been big on logic and consistency. She has to put the word patriots in quotes when it applies to people on the right, even when they agree with her in opposition to this bill.

[massgopguy]

So, Code Pink could be hauled in for aiding the insurgents?

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

BUMP

[Ernie Kaputnik]

The conspiracy theory about FEMA Concentration Camps doesn’t sound as crazy I used to think it was.

“IF” the gubmint intends to hold people in detention indefinitely, they are going to need someplace to hold them.

Food for thought.

[TheBigIf]

More BS anti-National Security rhetoric from the same crowd. How is it shocking at all that Ron Paul and the ACLU agree? They have both continually stood for terrorist rights on issue after issue.

We have already been told by these same people that the Patriot Act was going to result in Americans being denied trials and locked up. These same groups stand against every single bit of legislation that is anti-terrorist. Ron Paul, Code Pink, the ACLU and a host of others groups predictably come out and make the same claims over and over and over again in defense of terrorists.

I am so sick of this terrorists civil rights movement here in the United States being run by the likes of Code Pink, Ron Paul and the ACLU. They have never met a dictator or terrorist that they didn’t like.

There is no suprise at all for libertarians to be agreeing with the radical leftist of Code Pink or the ACLU. The libertarian party was formed to join the radical left in the anti-war movement of the counter culture sixties.

[Yo-Yo]

I would like to believe that any law that circumvents due process for US citizens would be ruled unconstitutional by the court system.

However, precedent has been set with the internment of US citizens of Japanese descent during WWII.

If Zero and/or a successor DemocRAT manages to alter the balance of the Supreme Court, I'm afraid that the indefinite military detention of US citizens would be found constitutional.

[TheBigIf]

Senator Marco Rubio Defends NDAA

http://government.brevardtimes.com/2011/12/senator-marco-rubio-defends-ndaa.html

[faucetman]

“co-sponsored by Senators John McCain and Carl Levin,”

All you need to know.

[bunkerhill7]

Webster defines `belligerent` as
``waging war; specifically : belonging to or RECOGNIZED AS A STATE OF WAR and
protected by and subject to the laws of war.``

Ergo, Congress would have to declare war upon each separate citizen before the government can do anything.

Only Congress can declare war.

[Pride in the USA]

ping

[Right Wing Assault]

I allege Dick Obama to be a member of Al Qaeda. Arrest and detain him indefinitely, please.

[LucyT]

A dangerous bill heading toward the p_resident would gut our rights.

According to the “law of war” invoked by these sections of the NDAA, a person in military custody can be held indefinitely, without charge and without access to civilian courts. - Perhaps most significant, with the suspension of constitutional provisions for due process, there would be no Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. During the Congressional debate over the NDAA, proponents like Senators Saxby Chambliss and Lindsey Graham argued that when we capture someone deemed an enemy, we must start with the presumption that “the goal is to gather intelligence” and “prosecution is a secondary concern.”

In infantile terms, they declared “the nastiest killers in the world” should be questioned for “as long as it takes,” without them “lawyering up.” This need to make “them” talk was cited repeatedly, as though Abu Ghraib had never happened.


Article, also # 5 , # 11 .

[tutstar]

bump