Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They Define as Being R

reply to post by Raivan31
What do you think the 2500 Marines that Obama has installed in Australia is for?

This is all about him becomeing the "KING" of the world...............can't say the Americans don't like to share.

I would point out a sentence in the sourse article for this thread...


"The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing."


Folks, I have to say this. If these two Senators did this to America, they need to be branded as traitors of this nation, IMO.

John McCain has been increasingly a war-mongering fool over the last few years. No one will call him on it because he spent a few years in a Viet Cong prison many years ago. But, when you will turn on your own fellow citizens such as he seems to have done here he becomes the threat to freedom.

Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) need to be called out publicaly and exposed for their traitorus actions, IMO! ......

What are your thoughts?

I read through the entire thread and honestly I remain unconvinced. But comparing the ACLU article with what the bill actually says seems worlds apart. The frustrating thing is that most of the replies to this thread are people who only read the ACLU article, didn't bother to read the bill or any argument counter to the ACLU article, and now just assume the Government is out to get them yet again. Guys, a follower that believes an argument, without looking for a counter argument, is still a follower. All I ask is that everyone: 1. Read the bill. 2. Read the counter arguments to the ACLU article. 3. Find the truth for yourself. I haven't been on this site long, but I see people blindly believing whatever is presented to them *ALL* the time, without ever considering counter arguments. You say the rest of the world blindly believes what the media and their governments tell them, and you're doing the same thing here.

With that being said...The Patriot Act is the worst thing ever to happen to this country.

reply to post by romanmel


My thoughts are as bad as Obama has been can you imagine McCain as President. This isn't the first time he has been involved in some pretty insane ideas. He is either senile or has totally lost his mind. I don't understand how anyone anywhere would want laws like they have been pushing.

You guys are all sheep believing anything the media shoves into your mouths.

Read the bill section thingie, pg 362 of: www.gpo.gov...

Read the ACLU article that seems to be pushing the Udall amendment: www.aclu.org...

Read the Udall proposed amendment: www.scribd.com...

Doesn't apply to US citizens and legal aliens...but if you commit a crime, I'm sure you'll be locked up.

The Udall amendment puts the guantanamo bay guys into our civil courts to be tried with the same rights as a US citizen... They deserve to rot in jail for failing in their terrorist duty of blowing themselves up.

Stop being sheep.

Originally posted by old_god
reply to post by Frira

 

I generally don't take sides but I have to agree I couldn't actually find what was wrong with your posts...sure you are opinionated but then that is a good thing rather then being reflective of many of the views on this forum (and outside of it).

It's not the size of your pen or how many pages you write with it but the words that matter. I look forward to reading more of your posts.

Adios.

edit on 26-11-2011 by old_god because: I ran out of cookies

edit on 26-11-2011 by old_god because: (no reason given)

Thank you. Despite how I have been characterized, I have many grievances against my government.

The 14th amendment is ignored by the IRS in confiscating property without a hearing, and even by a loop hole in divorce courts in several states (guess how I know that one!).

Cameras are everywhere now and the US is fast becoming like the UK in that regard.

I assume, but do not know, that every keystroke I make on the Internet, and ever text or voice made via a phone is at least passively monitored by a computer-- and I do not like it.

And the news media tells, for example, that "the new cameras have resulted in at least one arrest since they were installed" which I take to mean someone who was late in paying a traffic ticket was arrested after being seen parking at their place of work-- because if the truth was that a known terrorist had been arrested they would have said so.

Those are not related to this proposed bill.

The over-the-top characterization of a bill (which only controversy seems to be that POW's are to remain under military court jurisdiction) as "Big Brother" and a threat to freedom just makes no sense. That I say so, has me called a "shill" and recipient of other ad hominem replies.

Maybe the bill does have something in it that I would find violates my freedoms or the freedoms of at least some Americans, but so far, I haven't found it; and those claiming that it most certainly does contain such things have yet to produce the words from the bill indicating it.

I am still waiting for someone to provide evidence of ANY nation whose laws regarding prisoners of war allow the belligerent to be processed by civil or criminal, rather than military, courts. To my knowledge, military courts all over the world have always handled POW's-- the US included. This is not establishing a new precedent-- this is preventing a new precedent... and one which I think is ill-advised.

I mean, in the first Iraq war, we had taken something like 80,000 prisoners of war in three days. This bill prevents those 80,000 from being charged, individually, with (for example) "assault with a deadly weapon" and put in US prisons even long after hostilities have ceased, as if being captured makes them US citizens. How is that helpful?

reply to post by Frira


The bill is pro military if you would read it.

Originally posted by OldCorp
reply to post by Kali74

 

He never picked up a weapon, he was not a planner of any attacks, and there was no imminent threat to the US. There is no reason why he couldn't have AT LEAST been charged with a crime before being killed. So much for the 5th Amendment.

Look, I have no love for that scumbag whatsoever, but what Obama did was unconstitutional. "NO PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." Ring a bell? The "No person" part is pretty damned clear. It make NO exceptions for anything. As an American citizen, he deserved a trial before being executed. Period.

In reality, america is not much different than any second world middle eastern nation. We simply have the pretention of law&order. When TSHTF you can bet they will start with water cannons, tear gas, battons, rubber bullets, etc and as conditions escalate into full martial law and pissed off citizens start firing their personal weapons with live ammo, then the government will retaliate with live ammo of their own and detention camps.

It is NOT the american government versus the american people as I see so many posters claim, it is the nwo plague versus every national citizen. The bankers, european nobility and vatican rule. Trace the money and you find the enemy. Constitutional government got hijacked as soon as the laws were written, slowely and methodically over the the decades and centuries, till we reach today and tomorrow.

I could go into more detail but people have a tendency to laugh or become hysterical with things they do not understand, so I will cut my speech short for now.

It doesn't surprise me that this was introduced by the neocon republicans. Both parties can be blamed for getting this country into conflicts, but these republicans are hell bent on introducing legislation based upon "fear of domestic terrorists" that really goes against our basic constitutional rights. Our elected officials are going against their constitutional oath just by introducing this legislation!

These pieces of legislation that our being introduced are cleverly designed to slide passages that restrict the freedom and constitutional rights of citizens. This leaves the door wide open for government interpretation and a way to control government descent.

OK..so we're almost at a decision point. Say this passes and is signed into law(which it almost certainly will be, Barack Obama is a coward). Then, because we(you) dissent, because we don't believe the 9/11 fairytale story, or a hundred other things, because the law is so broad, the military comes knocking. you're on the list for detainment. Do you go willingly...or...?

Yes. It's time to think about THAT. just so you can all connect the dots a little more, read this article by Naomi Wolfe..re: coordinated DHS involvement in suppressing OWS gu.com...

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by OldCorp

 

Al-Alwaki was a self proclaimed al-qaeda operative of his own accord he was an enemy combatant and traitor.

Yes, but none of that invalidates his citizenship. He was american, and was supposed to be guaranteed due process under the 5th amendment. He was denied that, and summarily executed, as was his teenage son soon after. You could be next. We all could. You comfortable with that? you so sure they wouldn't put you on the list? I believe they use hellfire missiles..might want to invest in some armor plating..just sayin'

Originally posted by DrunkenDonuts
I read through the entire thread and honestly I remain unconvinced. But comparing the ACLU article with what the bill actually says seems worlds apart. The frustrating thing is that most of the replies to this thread are people who only read the ACLU article, didn't bother to read the bill or any argument counter to the ACLU article, and now just assume the Government is out to get them yet again. Guys, a follower that believes an argument, without looking for a counter argument, is still a follower. All I ask is that everyone: 1. Read the bill. 2. Read the counter arguments to the ACLU article. 3. Find the truth for yourself. I haven't been on this site long, but I see people blindly believing whatever is presented to them *ALL* the time, without ever considering counter arguments. You say the rest of the world blindly believes what the media and their governments tell them, and you're doing the same thing here.

With that being said...The Patriot Act is the worst thing ever to happen to this country.

edit on 26-11-2011 by DrunkenDonuts because: (no reason given)

I agree, but, even if ACLU is behaving in an alarmist fashion, they do so with good reason. The bill(soon law) will not be implemented by the numbers..not what's on the page that counts, it's between the gray legal lines that's the issue. Look at the whole picture, fit this in with the NWO agenda overall, and you see what the intent is. So, yes, on paper the bill isn't as bad as it's being portrayed..but in practice, it will be. ACLU knows this..

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


Supreme Court has already ruled on this topic, numerous times now. Posse Commitatus, contrary to what certain members think, was not removed and is still a matter of law and still in effect.

Aside from a blog, does anyonre have the actual defense authorization bill this is supposedly attached to?

Originally posted by WeRpeons
It doesn't surprise me that this was introduced by the neocon republicans. Both parties can be blamed for getting this country into conflicts, but these republicans are hell bent on introducing legislation based upon "fear of domestic terrorists" that really goes against our basic constitutional rights. Our elected officials are going against their constitutional oath just by introducing this legislation!

These pieces of legislation that our being introduced are cleverly designed to slide passages that restrict the freedom and constitutional rights of citizens. This leaves the door wide open for government interpretation and a way to control government descent.

Sen Carl Levin is Repub? Man, I do have an eye doctor appointment today, but I could swear there is a D in back of his name.

reply to post by romanmel


The bill was not drafted in secret...IT is called the National Defense Authorization Act and has been voted on every year for a long time...since the 80's...

Did this bring Caesar and the Rubicon to mind for anyone else?

2nd line

I assume it is due to terrorism concerns, however, I find it interesting that if you pay attention to just the outcomes of the actions, it come down to there being more controle over the general public. This could give probable cause to the theory that the government actually had a part in 9-11. They are trying to turn the public against the faceless danger of "terrorism" and against others so that this is not noticed.
... this is just an observation however.

reply to post by Perfectmatthew


Right after 9/11 Bush wanted to use military personell to arrest some of the terrorists involved tha were not able to make the flights. This was quickly shot down for violation of Posse Commitatus as well as being bad politics, regardless of how good natured the intention was.

When the Bush administration says no - it makes one stop and think. It also gives one pause to realize Obama and his administration has done more to act in secrecy than Bush ever did.

Talk about your chickens coming home to roost.

Wow, if they use this against innocent citizens i hope the ones making the arrest meet a very painful death. Americans are armed. I'm not afraid to shoot.

We need to end this before it's too late. They just keep pushing and pushing. So far the only thing anyone has done is protest and that hasn't accomplished much. We need to send a clear message that this is our country

Originally posted by ChuckNasty
reply to post by Frira

 

The bill is pro military if you would read it.

Yes, by definition and by title, but (apparently) that is only if I would read it.