40 Members of Congress Protest 'Indefinite Detention' Bill

reply to post by pianopraze


I would trust him if he gave the specific parts of the bill he's talking about. You don't need a law degree to read and comprehend. They rejected that amendment, but they added in another one that upheld common law. That sounds bad, but I think common law is enough to protect us from an over zealous government. Actually, that's the only part that does worry me; they rejected an amendment that would clearly protect Americans and chose an amendment that should protect us.

Question : What is happening to this country?

Answer : "The Israelization of America!"

Source : prorevnews.blogspot.com...

F.T.G.

one they already hav tha eability to do these things and have been doing these things all along

the second gen and later Japanese
Tesla
zundle....3 years in solitary without charge

these government sponsered confusions are always created to hide BANKING stuff
like MF GLOBAL

same same as that retarded missle over the coast BS: they passed so evil banking stuff then

THIS BILL CONTROVERCY IS AN OP

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by DROKKR

 

So what do they know that we don't?

Any ideas?

S&F&

btw

They know that the collapse of the € is months, if not weeks, away. And that this collapse will send the global markets into an unprecedented crash that even massive market manipulation cannot control.
It would mean major banks collapsing overnight, corporations sinking without trace as their CEO's jump ship, and it will likely mean social unrest on a scale we have never seen in recorded history, all over the world, simultaneously. ......

I agree, but would add the economic impacts of the -current- chronic disease NCD Pandemic and the -coming- flu pandemic. The financial effects of the NCD Pandemic have been noted and tracked for at least 4 decades - and the appearance of a virulent plague is overdue. imho - the 2008 financial crisis was orchestrated to pull all the liquid and concrete assets out of the system before they could be re-allocated to "protect public health."

...."social unrest on a scale we have never seen in recorded history, all over the world, simultaneously." Indeed.

reply to post by sonnny1


Only further proof that they are all bought and paid for.

I see very little mention if any as to who wrote and sponsored this Bill ?

None other than Obama's Opponent in 2008....John McCain.

Earlier this week, Conservative Action Alerts reported that the Senate failed to approve amendments curtailing the power of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, a bill crafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ) that would declare the entire United States of America as a military battlefield. The DoD Bill also provides the President power to hold American citizens indefinitely and waives the right to trial, codified in the Bill of Rights.

McCain I also never trusted for he too is bought and paid for AIPAC supporter.

In fact McCains Dad as an Navy Admiral was instrumental in the USS Liberty coverup.
So they have long been bought and paid for......by the Bankers.


A big Mididle Finger Salute to you John McCain for introducing this Bill !~




Where were all of you Ron Paul supporters in 2008 ?
Voting for this Zionist Shill McCain A$$HOLE ?


www.conservativeactionalerts.com...

Originally posted by Elostone
This is stunning, incredible legislation.
Not only is it UTTERLY against the US Constitution, but it also appears to defy the Geneva Convention.
I am numb...I was born into a Nation where one was INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty...
I now live in Bizzaro World, 180 degrees from where I thought I was.
Did someone lobotomize me...or the world when I wasn't looking, or what?
Am I living in some hellish parallel universe?

I told my wife basically the same thing last night. I don't feel like I am living in the same country I grew up in. As screwed up as it was 30 years ago I never felt like I was a prisoner or criminal to my government. I still had pride to be an American. I feel like the architects of Nazism in the 1920s and 1930s are hard at work in the United States and that nearly the entirety of elected officials are involved.

This bill now shows its was never the (R) vs the (D). Its now the people vs the government!

Originally posted by ararisq

Originally posted by Elostone
This is stunning, incredible legislation.
Not only is it UTTERLY against the US Constitution, but it also appears to defy the Geneva Convention.
I am numb...I was born into a Nation where one was INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty...
I now live in Bizzaro World, 180 degrees from where I thought I was.
Did someone lobotomize me...or the world when I wasn't looking, or what?
Am I living in some hellish parallel universe?

I told my wife basically the same thing last night. I don't feel like I am living in the same country I grew up in. As screwed up as it was 30 years ago I never felt like I was a prisoner or criminal to my government. I still had pride to be an American. I feel like the architects of Nazism in the 1920s and 1930s are hard at work in the United States and that nearly the entirety of elected officials are involved.

Its a bad episode of the twilight zone if you ask me

reply to post by camaro68ss


I hope more wake up to that fact, as long as they maintain the illusion that the problem is Democrat or Republican they keep the populace controlled

reply to post by Throwback


If my understanding of the situation is correct, and since this is so shrouded in mystery it very well may not be, you are basing your interpretation on an inaccuracy. You're assuming that common law does not provide for indefinite detention of enemy combatants, regardless of citizenship.

The first quote of section 1032 you provide shows that the requirement for military detention does not include American citizens, and legal aliens. This is simply to say that the military does not have to interrupt any FBI or other law enforcement initiative taken against someone and detain them in military fashion immediately. It does not say that U.S. citizens are immune to military detention if deemed enemy combatants. The supreme court has already upheld indefinite detention of U.S. citizens in the past. This just gives the office of the President authority to decide if the person will be held federally, or militarily. If they are not U.S. citizens or Legal Aliens, the default is military. It also forces Obama to define how he intends to implement this, within 60 days.

It would be like saying "I don't have to kill you if you break into my house, but I have to kill you if you break in and attack my wife." Nowhere does that say "I can't kill you if you break into my house." Since the Supreme Court has upheld this action before, we have to assume that the President will still have this option.

Your second quote of section 1031 shows that this will not be construed to affect existing laws regarding detention. Again, existing laws support detention of U.S. citizens if deemed enemy combatants. This section, then, is read as not granting any immunity to lawful residents. Furthermore, since the Supreme Court would have to make a ruling if a part of this bill was challenged, and they have ruled in support of detentions in the past, well....I wouldn't want to bet my life that my case even gets heard, much less ruled on in my favor. The only way you could challenge this was if you were already in detention. Good luck with that.

Full Text of that section which just passed the House:

(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be
20 construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
21 the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
22 aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
23 captured or arrested in the United States.

Do you really think they are intending to offer additional protections to "any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States?" They're saying this isn't supposed to change the scope, which is already massive. It is a clear piece of legislation designed to retain certain war powers provisions, and that could be interpreted as possibly escalating them. Whether this happens or not remains to be seen.

Nice to hear some members of congress have something to say about this rediculous piece of legislation. Not like it will slow the bill being signed by the president but atleast they will raise some awareness to uninformed americans. It amazes me how many people would prefer living under their nice cozy rock as opposed to looking into what the representatives they elect are doing to the US. Its scary living here knowing what may lay ahead for this once great country.

Ive been reading forums on ats for years now, more so recently due to the uncertianty in my mind for the next couple years, and this bill convinced me to join. Aint no better place to discuss topics like these i think its about time i join the discussion.

Only 40?

Hey kids, guess what time it is? It's insurrection time! YAAAAAAY!

It's time for a French revolution style coup. Heads should roll, the tree should be watered, no one should be so empowered as to be above the Constitution. I don't think people have the stones to do what needs to be done. Instead they will make us all VERY uncomfortable, but not desperate and say: "If you tell us who has Gold, Guns, Illegal drugs, food caches or is an Activist/troublemaker, we'll give you a stipend for a few weeks of food, water, and fuel.... This is how they will do it, they will have us turn on our own families and friends to "survive" Once the "resistors" are mostly gone they will go after the "expendables" based on how well connected you are you likely are expendable. All I can say don't get on the bus to "go to work"...

Please try to stay calm.

Remember, we have three branchs of government for a reason.

If for any reason this bill is found unconstiutional, it will be overturned in the Supreme Court


With that said, Im with most of you. A lot scared.

so we draft a citizens bill

it says in essence you're fired except... these 40 people
we are not required to follow unconstitutional laws,

i live in holland, but im scared for you guys over there

what was this talk about fema camps being set out this week ?

may god forbid, can there be some kind of "thing" going on ?

something fishy going on

my brayers be with you (us) al

ow and my signature has nothing to do with tis, comes straight from my heart

btw, whats this about 40 against, this link:
edition.cnn.com...
gives 93vs7 i mean

Originally posted by DROKKR
This just popped up on my Facebook feed -

www.thepetitionsite.com...

Signed and posted to facebook.

How is a crazy idea like this even entertained by these elected officials??? We have lost our country, its been gone for sometime now, but its getting to that breaking point where the masses need to take it back and restore order....

Originally posted by kellynap43
Please try to stay calm.

Remember, we have three branchs of government for a reason.

If for any reason this bill is found unconstiutional, it will be overturned in the Supreme Court

edit on 15-12-2011 by kellynap43 because: (no reason given)

Haha, who appoints the members of the Supreme Court? Oh right, Congress and the White House... The Supreme Court tends to judge things Constitutional that aren't in the Constitution. Take for example, the "corporations as people" nonsense....

reply to post by Jiggyfly

Originally posted by Throwback
Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by Throwback

 

No exaggeration, this is probably the 100th time that I explain this. IT APPLIES TO AMERICAN CITIZENS. The language is MADE so it's deceptive.

The requirement
20 to detain a person in military custody under this sec-
21 tion does not extend to citizens of the United States.

That means that every time people are arrested for ``terrorism``, they are not REQUIRED to be put in a military jail, but they CAN be.

This means exactly what it says it means. The requirement they are talking about is not being put in military jail. The requirement they are talking about is:

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para-
9 graph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States
10 shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who
11 is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by
12 the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public
13 Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition
14 under the law of war.

This requirement is further detailed in section 1031 C:

(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposi-
2 tion of a person under the law of war as described in sub-
3 section (a) may include the following:
4 (1) Detention under the law of war without trial
5 until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Au-
6 thorization for Use of Military Force.
7 (2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United
8 States Code (as amended by the Military Commis-
9 sions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–
10 84)).
11 (3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or
12 competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
13 (4) Transfer to the custody or control of the per-
14 son’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or
15 any other foreign entity

I think it is pretty well stated what WILL happen. There are no cans, ifs, buts, ors, etc. in the language.

Nothing in this section shall be
20 construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
21 the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
22 aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
23 captured or arrested in the United States.

That's because they already have the authority with the military commission acts.

Everyone is saying this is bad bill. Congressmen, senators, lawyers, rights activists, etc...

THIS IS NOT A GOOD BILL.

Americans are protected from indefinite detention. It doesn't matter what acts were passed. Enemy combatants are not. Even the Supreme Court has ruled that Americans cannot be detained indefinitely. Here is the Supreme Court ruling. That case, in fact, deals with those military commission acts.

I don't understand the fuss over this. I suspect these provisions were added so that the assasination of Anwar al-Awlaki would be legal-- not for a NWO martial law plot.

edit on 15-12-2011 by Throwback because: (no reason given)