NDAA/S.1867 passes the house

reply to post by benedict9


You are entirely correct about history repeating. It has done this over and over again. It is just sad the sheeple have not seen it before.

Today, 2011 has become very much like 1775. You would think some people would notice how things have been changing over the past forty years.

So, I would predict, the next few years will become very much like 1776 and beyond.

I only hope the next 236 year cycle will not end as this cycle has. Wish I could be around to know for myself, but I will likely go the way of those others at the "beginning" of this great country.

reply to post by hdutton

So, I would predict, the next few years will become very much like 1776 and beyond.

Catalyst events and the fallout that results from them will ensue the enacting of draconian measures positioned in place for this timeline. The so called 'elite' masters are aware of the grander celestial cycles and are actively engineering events that coincide with the timing of a natural procession.

I do not want to get too off topic although there is a much larger picture in place. However all the evil they help inflict they feel is a 'divine' undertaking to usher in the new Kingdom essentially fulfilling Biblical Prophecy. The false kingdom will directly precede the True, for this is a 'NWO' that is Luciferian at it's core and essence.

We have been warned well ahead of time what the 'antichrists' (divine imitators) will establish during this age of great deception. Eyes wide shut.

You Americans aren't going to do anything about this. You should, but you aren't going to.

You see, this site is a rather small section of the American population. Those of you here, want to fight against these things, but the rest of the masses who never have even heard of this site, or topics like these have no idea what your talking about when you say they should protest this.

You need to get off this site.

You need to get to your local militia's and local places of political talk and spead the word.

You need to camp out on the local MP's office until what you want is given.

ATS is not your answer. Go out, and spread this news via other ways.

reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms


So changes to the bill were made under pressure from a veto from the white house that requires the military to get approval to detain a U.S. citizen, if determined to be a combatant, changes that republicans did not want to make, and fought to prevent from being made.

So if a U.S. citizen is caught in a plot to nuke us, who is a member of some terrorist organization, or multiple, clearly working with enemies of our nation, through proper authorization, that person can be held indefinitely without trial. They made legal what has been going on for decades now.

Scary, but creating a law for what was being done in secret probably grants more access to legal rights for who ever gets detained.

Still doesn't change the reality that the republicans were the cheer leaders who wanted the military to have full control over their ability to detain a U.S. citizen without a trial.

reply to post by MrSmith


I would not be surprised to learn of many members of this site not only being involved with many militia groups but also active members of the U S military.

Since you seem to be up on many things "American", but not in the U S, could you help me find my "MP"?

I have tried "Google", "Yahoo" and several other search engines. I just can't find their name nor their office.

I live in northwestern Alabama, if it will help. Oh, and don't think where I live automatically says anything about me personally. Just so you will know.

Just as a reminder to those who seem to forget:

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” – Patrick Henry

I can only hope some of us have not been listening to some of our current "historians" who may have become political candidates.

reply to post by hdutton


“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” – Patrick Henry

Tell that to the republican party and the ICBs, they are the ones trying to morph the U.S. into a police state.

Time to stop denying the reality that stares us in the face people.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms

 

So changes to the bill were made under pressure from a veto from the white house that requires the military to get approval to detain a U.S. citizen, if determined to be a combatant, changes that republicans did not want to make, and fought to prevent from being made.

So if a U.S. citizen is caught in a plot to nuke us, who is a member of some terrorist organization, or multiple, clearly working with enemies of our nation, through proper authorization, that person can be held indefinitely without trial. They made legal what has been going on for decades now.

Scary, but creating a law for what was being done in secret probably grants more access to legal rights for who ever gets detained.

So bascially you proved my point, kk thanks. Only took you a day to do so, and yep just like I thought Obama (soon enough), congressional democrats and senate democrats voted it in with minor cosmetic changes which do nothing. If this was Bush and the Repubs you would be foaming in the mouth I am sure. Makes me ashamed to be a leftist, you are no different from the Neo Cons.

The elitists that keep this red/blue fight thing going must be laughing at people like you. I bet you'll vote for Obama again after he whispers sweet nothngs in your ear

Oh and btw I am in NO way defending the Republicans because they have more than done their part, I just judge progressives (or whatever the heck you call yourself) a lot more harshly because you should know better by now after 8 years of Bush.

Anyone know if this has been signed by President Obama yet?

I've been trying to find out all day, but there is not much out there on this even though it could be one of the worst pieces of legislation to go into effect since the Patriot Act.

reply to post by Propulsion


i agree & do the same here in the UK, but as i have mentioned the problem in the USA is the two party system because all it does is breed career politicians that leads to a political elite class with fingers in many pies that they will all band together to protect their own interests.

i know we have problems in the UK but it's much easier for us to get our MP's exposed for wrong doing & in most cases it makes the national press where as in the USA in most instances the news may not even get outside the State.

the USA needs a much smaller government !

reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms


Umm, did you actually have a point?

Let me state my perspective on the thread and the issue. Conservative/Republican leaning people want to pin this on Obama, just like the Wall Street bailout, but in fact it is the Conservative/Republicans representatives in congress who are fully supporting and backing this bill. The Democratic/Liberal leaning representatives are the only ones opposing the bill, or making changes in the bill so that there is more protection for American citizens.

Do you have a perspective on what I stated in my post, other than thinking that I am wrong for opposing the current crop of Republicans in Washington, and pointing out the hypocrisy of those who express outrage, while ignoring the role Republicans are playing in the passing of this bill?

I have a lot of problems with Democrats, see my signature, but this current crop of Republicans are supported by people who claim they believe in the ideals behind the Constitution, while ignoring that their representatives in Congress are doing everything they can do to undermine the ideals expressed in the U.S. Constitution.

Here is a thread I started on this subject.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hoping to get re-opened.

We are no longer a country where the government fears its people, the people fear the government.
I could care less about the democrat/republican fights. It's the same thing. And I do agree that it is funny that the people that were screaming for Bush/Cheney's head are now silent on Obama.
The threat of the veto was because the President wanted to have the authority to imprison people, not congress.
Remember, the Patriot Act was to stop and/or track terrorists. This new law gives the authority to nab anyone the administration thinks is against the government. Without evidence, a trial, or due process. Look up the what a terrorist can be described as. Veterans, gun owners, protesters, someone missing fingers anyone who may have a grudge against the government. So while you are thinking of the here and now, they are thinking five, ten years from now. Anytime the government takes control of something or makes a new law, it isn't long before it is extremely bloated and wasting billions of dollars or we see how badly a new law was abused. This will be no different and it doesn't matter if the people that sign it are blue or red.

reply to post by stinger94


Sorry that reality is something you ignore in your post, so I must point out the facts that you ignore.

Republicans pushed for the right of the military to detain a U.S. citizen without a trial, indefinitely.

Obama threatened a veto until language was inserted into the bill requiring the Military to get approval from the executive branch before doing such a thing. A compromise was made, with the republicans being on the side who pushed for eliminating the fundamental rights of U.S. citizens.

Once again, Obama is being blamed for the action and intentions of Republicans representatives in Washington.

If you honestly cared about the issue, then you should learn what happened before make unfounded assumptions.

reply to post by MrSmith


Be careful what you wish for. If the "Sleeping Giant" ever wakes up again, it won't be pretty.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by stinger94

 

Sorry that reality is something you ignore in your post, so I must point out the facts that you ignore.

Republicans pushed for the right of the military to detain a U.S. citizen without a trial, indefinitely.

Obama threatened a veto until language was inserted into the bill requiring the Military to get approval from the executive branch before doing such a thing. A compromise was made, with the republicans being on the side who pushed for eliminating the fundamental rights of U.S. citizens.

Once again, Obama is being blamed for the action and intentions of Republicans representatives in Washington.

If you honestly cared about the issue, then you should learn what happened before make unfounded assumptions.

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't Obama's administration request that they include the part about US citizens being detained without a trial, indefinitely?

reply to post by Hanma


No, that is a claim made by some committee member, but not backed by any evidence, The Obama Admin publicly stated they would veto the bill that protect U.S. citizens. I have provided links that show this, and statements from numerous people involved in the negotiations.

What's going on with our reaction to this despicable law?

Has anyone organized a petition or a way to approach the legislators who sponsored this and signed this?

Are we just letting it go?

reply to post by MRuss


Chris Hedges is suing to have it repeal. It's gonna go to the Supreme Court.

The law takes effect in March.

What my senator sent me in a e-mail about why he voted for the NDAA.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting me about my vote on the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

The U.S. Senate recently passed the National Defense Authorization Act that included language to address the handling of terrorists and enemy belligerents detained by the United States. Over recent years, there have been several proposals, including the Terrorist Detainees Procedures Act, which would grant those detained as enemy belligerents for suspected terrorist acts against the United States the rights and privileges of American citizens. I do not believe enemy belligerents have constitutional privileges, including access to federal courts to question our military authority and control.

I supported the FY12 defense bill because I have great concerns about the possibility of allowing into the United States individuals who were and will likely remain a threat to our homeland security. I believe the safety and security of our country depends upon allowing the military to pursue options to maintain our security, including detaining and interrogating terrorists.

The Obama Administration has effectively created a false choice for dealing with terrorists captured overseas: either bring them to the United States to be given the full constitutional rights available to U.S. citizens in our civilian court system or release them to return to the fight against the United States. The detainee provisions of the FY12 defense bill (S. 1867), which were unanimously passed by the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, would address this issue. Critics have launched several misleading arguments against these provisions. However, the practice of holding captured terrorists in military detention is based in long historical practice, even back to George Washington, and the provisions in the 2012 defense bill are supported by Supreme Court precedent, past practice, and common sense. Rest assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as the U.S. Senate considers legislation affecting the Guantanamo detainees.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about any other issue important to you.