McCain's Terror Bill: American citizens will be sent to military prisons

[Blackhawk2001]

I haven't read all the article posted by Keith yet, but the bill does state that the powers of the President to make such determinations ends when the Authorization for Use of Military Force is terminated, which Congress certainly has the power to do. I realize that won't give you a warm-and-fuzzy ATOMonkey.

[rambone]

How Congress is Signing its own Arrest Warrants in the NDAA Citizen Arrest bill

I never thought I would have to write this: but—incredibly—Congress has now passed the National Defense Appropriations Act, with Amendment 1031, which allows for the military detention of American citizens. The amendment is so loosely worded that any American citizen could be held without due process. The language of this bill can be read to assure Americans that they can challenge their detention — but most people do not realize what this means: at Guantanamo and in other military prisons, one’s lawyer’s calls are monitored, witnesses for one’s defense are not allowed to testify, and one can be forced into nudity and isolation. Incredibly, ninety-three Senators voted to support this bill and now most of Congress: a roster of names that will live in infamy in the history of our nation, and never be expunged from the dark column of the history books.

[rambone]

NDAA Would "Quash Dissent" on Internet

Section 954 of the NDAA, entitled "Military Activities in Cyberspace," states:

Congress affirms that the Department of Defense has the capability, and upon direction by the President may conduct offensive operations in cyberspace to defend our Nation, Allies and interests subject to (1) the policy principles and legal regimes that the Department follows for kinetic capabilities, including the law of armed conflict; and (2) the War Powers Resolution." [Emphasis added.]

The Pentagon had already voiced an interest in tightening control over the Internet in July, when Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn announced that the Pentagon would be treating cyberspace as an “operational domain” in its Department of Defense Strategy for Operating in Cyberspace:

The United States reserves the right, under the laws of armed conflict, to respond to serious cyber attacks with a proportional and justified military response at the time and place of our choosing. In the 21st Century, bits and bytes can be as threatening as bullets and bombs.

Keystrokes originating in one country can impact the other side of the globe in the blink of an eye.…Treating cyberspace as a domain means that the military needs to operate and defend its networks, and to organize, train, and equip its forces to perform cyber missions.

[rambone]

She thinks that she is the most consistent presidential candidate on constitutional issues. Righhhht.


Michele Bachmann continues to get free pass for voting "Aye" on NDAA

Perhaps one of the most dangerous bills to pass Congress in our lifetimes; the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) had originally been voted on in the US House back in May. Although many Americans were outraged back then of the potential dangers of this bill, it did not receive much national attention or massive outrage until it was more recently debated in the Senate and was made even worse by the additional sections added that incorporated the use of our military in carrying out its dangerous provisions.

This has been the pattern on a few other atrocious bills including her vote in favor of the outrageous Food Safety Enhancement Bill in which Michele Bachmann and many others also enjoyed a free pass from national coverage because of the same type of situation in which a bill first introduced in the House had passed under the radar only to later get stuck there and many people did not even know about it. While I will give her credit where credit is due on her work against some of the bailouts and Obamacare, but when it comes to some of the more serious issues involving infringements on our Bill of Rights, no member of Congress should be given a free pass. In fact, they should all be sent home packing if they don't vote to uphold their oath and especially those professing to be Tea Partiers and supposed Constitutionalists. South Dakota's newest Tea Party member and lone Congresswoman, I did not just let her off the hook either.

GovTrack: House Vote On Passage: H.R. 1540: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

[rambone]

1) He doesn't know about it.

2) He thinks the government needs the capacity to use something like it.

3) But he's just a sober guy, he'll never use it against you. Yes, you'll just have to trust him! No rule of law, just rule of men.

You Tube

You Tube

[KG1]

Originally Posted by rambone

NDAA Would "Quash Dissent" on Internet

I'm not ready to call chicken little on this one or automatically support the claim that they would be enacting this for the sole purpose of quashing dissent.

A cyber warfare attack is a very real concern and it would be naive and dangerous to not be prepared for such an event.

[ZombieApocolypse]

Wasnt there a topic/post on here about the government buying up large amounts of land in the middle of nowheres? Seems like perfect places to put these "military prisons."

[KG1]

Originally Posted by ZombieApocolypse

Wasnt there a topic/post on here about the government buying up large amounts of land in the middle of nowheres? Seems like perfect places to put these "military prisons."

I would hold up a bit with the tinfoil.

These land grabs in the western part of the country by the Obama administration and spearheaded by his toady minion Sec. of the Interior Ken Salazar are an attempt to lock up acreage to control the usage of natural resources.

Just goggle "Obama federal land grab" There is plenty of information on this subject. Here's just one piece that discusses the issue.

States rising up to fight Obama land grab: Alaska, Utah file suit

Last August, I told you about the “Great Outdoors Initiative” to lock up more open spaces through executive order. This came on top on top of a separate, property-usurping initiative exposed by GOP Rep. Robert Bishop and Sen. Jim DeMint earlier this spring. According to an internal, 21-page Obama administration memo, 17 energy-rich areas in 11 states have been targeted as potential federal “monuments.”

[rambone]

Ron Paul Calls National Defense Authorization Act "Slip Into Tyranny"

“A dictator enjoys unrestrained power over the people. The legislative and judicial branches voluntarily cede this power or it’s taken by force. Most of the time, it’s given up easily, out of fear in time of war and civil disturbances, and with support from the people, although the dictator will also accumulate more power with the use of force.” Those prescient words of Republican presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) are taken from his book Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom. The tyrannical assumption of power by the President and the cession of unheralded power to him by the Congress has taken place precisely as Dr. Paul warned.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is an unprecedented, unconstitutional, and unchecked grant of dictatorial power to the President in the name of protecting the security of “the homeland.” Ron Paul described the bill (soon to be signed into law by the President) as a “slip into tyranny,” one that will almost certainly accelerate “our descent into totalitarianism.”

[rambone]

Late in the day on a Saturday night, on New Years Eve, 2012, this Police State atrocity was signed into law. Obama had reservations but said our security would be jeopardized while the Bill of Rights still stands.




Obama Signs Defense Authorization Bill

President Obama signed on Saturday the defense authorization bill, formally ending weeks of heated debate in Congress and intense lobbying by the administration to strip controversial provisions requiring the transfer of some terror suspects to military custody.
"I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists," Obama said in a statement accompanying his signature.
The White House had originally threatened to veto the $662 billion bill, considered must-pass legislation, over the language that requires mandatory military custody for suspects linked to al-Qaida or its affiliates, even if they are captured in the U.S. Just before the House and Senate passed the bill comfortably, the White House said it would support the bill’s compromise language that, as tweaked by conference committee, would not impede the administration’s ability to collect intelligence or incapacitate dangerous terrorists.
Still, administration officials have admitted publicly the final provisions were not the preferred approach of this administration.
"Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people," Obama said in Saturday's satement.