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

page: 16
207
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Charles, Charles, Charles, I have read the federal code AND the enactment statues of the Code of federal regulations. I have read most of the government BS. Yes, you are and have been since 1860, a "U.S. citizen" and a creation of government because it was never rebutted. That IS a fact and you are not going to change that by saying BS, it needs to be documented.

Albert J. Nock wrote a book called, "Our Enemy the State", you should read it. Founding Fathers and Secret Societies is another good book to read. Common Sense and Rights of Man by Thomas Paine, also a good book, or you could just go to "barefootsworld.net" and do your own reading. That site has posts from hundreds of law scholars WHO ARE not any longer affiliated with the British Accredited Registry, the BAR as you refer to it.

All lawyers are liars and part of the problem, not part of the solution.


"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the state; individual so-called `ownership' is only by virtue of government, i.e., law, amounting to a mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State." -Senate Document No. 43, "Contracts payable in Gold" written in 1933.


If the ultimate ownership is IN the "state" or by the state, then who is the boss? See, you are a fool to believe that you are not controlled and that your property is yours. It is your strawman and until you take control of HIS power of Attorney, the state has it and you are a dupe. Once you have power of attorney, you say no and reject everything.

www.freemanitoba.com...

You can visit the link above and watch these guys actually go into court and beat the system. Sometimes they do spend time in jail for it but it is chiseling away at the lies and exposing the truth and it does take a strong man to do so. So you can believe what you want, the truth is here.

The military does not care what position you take as far as citizenship goes, for Me, there is no such thing, Citizenship does not exist and should not exist. We are human beings, men of the land, our Citizenship shall be somewhere else in another life, we are merely transient inhabitants of this planet. NO government shall ever have authority over those who created it nor their heirs. Understand that people, WE are the heirs of the government founded by our ancestors, WE have the right and not the government, it is as simple as that. Believe anything else and you truly are helpless.




posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Whether or not the sections were intended for american citizens or not, the language is too loose and needs to change. No american on american soil should ever be detained indefinitely with no trial regardless of suspicion. There is just way too much that can go wrong there. Label someone a terrorist or belligerent (whatever that means) and poof they disappear. It's very easy to change the laguage of two sections of a bill, these senators are being ridiculously stubborn.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
Whether or not the sections were intended for american citizens or not, the language is too loose and needs to change. No american on american soil should ever be detained indefinitely with no trial regardless of suspicion. There is just way too much that can go wrong there. Label someone a terrorist or belligerent (whatever that means) and poof they disappear. It's very easy to change the laguage of two sections of a bill, these senators are being ridiculously stubborn.


Reminds us of Pinochet in Chile. The bloddiest coup ever or so they say. Read some books on Pinochet, many, many people suddenly disappeared and were never seen again. The"U.S." corporation could easily do that, but it would be obvious, so they must TRY and make it a bit less obvious. So they pass silent legislation, which does NOT apply to the humans of the united states of America, but to it's employees, those who chose to be "U.S. citizens" under the 14th Amendment, which is a communist Amendment if you wish, and so if you do not obey the corporate policy, it is jail for you and because you surrendered your right of existence to begin with, shut the hell up!!!

That is it in a nutshell. The OWS movement is herding cattle AGAIN. When will people see the light? When will they wake up and say enough is enough. THE GOVERNMENT CAN LEGISLATE NO "LAW" TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY. Do we understand that so far? They can ONLY REGULATE COMMERCE BETWEEN THE STATES AND FOREIGN NATIONS.

This was the original intent of the founding fathers, to create a contract, like the Treaty of Paris, to regulate commerce, NOT PEOPLE. If you are a responsible adult, then you need not worry. Personal responsibility and inForming the "government" that you possess that and will do no harm to anyone else and to leave you the feck alone already, is how it works. Once again HJR-192 removed the liablity of the public to pay a debt, the government OWES YOU AND ME. We do not owe the government anything but a thanks for nothing.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Some posting on this thread have attempted to maintain that American citizens are exempted under Sections 1031 and 1032 of the National Defense Authorization Act.

THIS IS NOT TRUE. The devil is in the fine print as usual.


UPDATE: Don’t be confused by anyone claiming that the indefinite detention legislation does not apply to American citizens. It does. There is an exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032 of the bill), but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1031 of the bill). So, the result is that, under the bill, the military has the power to indefinitely imprison American citizens, but it does not have to use its power unless ordered to do so.
www.aclu.org...

Call your Senator (Senator's website has the number) and voice your dissent. It's quick, easy and it counts.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by daddio
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


I am only going to post thsi one more time here. ALL legislation, including the Constitutions, ARE and IS contract law. THERE IS NO COMMON LAW practiced in the world anymore because WE, the actual living souls and human beings, do not reject or REBUT the presumption!!!

You accept the LABELS as "resident" or "employee" and so on. WHY do you pay federal income taxes if you are NOT a federal employee? Thing is, you DID NOT rebut the claim THEY made that you ARE a federal employee or "state" employee. You name in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is in fact a corprate or legal fiction, it MAKES YOU a federal employee as THEY created you by GIVING you that all caps name, that is not how you learned to spell it in school is it? Us your freakin brain here.

Ever notice that sometimes this country of the 50 union states is refered to as the USA and sometimes the U.S., it IS one but NOT the other, the other is this...Guam, American Samao, the Virgin Islands and the trust territories of the Northern Marianas, and Puerto Rico, NOT TO INCLUDE the 50 union states. Yes, THAT and THAT ALONE is in FACT the U.S. It is a corporate fiction.

America, or the USA, IS and ONLY IS the 50 union states. If you wish to be a party to the "law society" of the U.S. then by all means go back to sleep. Keep signing your name to all the documents that ask if you are a "U.S. citizen". No you are not.

You are a transient inhabitant of earth and you reside in heaven. Well your soul would eventually but that is where your permanent residency actually IS. We must seperate ourselves back to the Sovereign state and rebut ALL presumptions so that WE take back OUR power and authority. It is simple enough, file a UCC-1 and take control of the strawman.

When oh when will you people wake up and get it?


I have woken a long time ago ! When i havve seen some Videos in the 90s of .....


Jordan Maxwell ( Website)

www.jordanmaxwell.com...

I would of Wiki,ed him but !!!

Wikipedia won't allow creation of a Jordan Maxwell
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Basically he said the same thing as you have said ! about the SSN & Your Birth Certificate

here is a Clip ! from basically what you have said !

Jordan Maxwell You are property of the elite globalist bankers


Different Version as above

Jordan Maxwell - You are property of the Rothschild family!


edit on 29-11-2011 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by robyn
Some posting on this thread have attempted to maintain that American citizens are exempted under Sections 1031 and 1032 of the National Defense Authorization Act.

THIS IS NOT TRUE.
Well, it's certainly true in part. Your own source says American citizens are exempted under 1032. So now all that's left is to eliminate the terrible effects of 1031.

So, what does 1031 have to say about changing the already existing law?

(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

What is this Authorization for Use of Military Force? It is a law passed in September of 2001.

(a) In General.--That the President is
authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those
nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized,
committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any
future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such
nations, organizations or persons.

This has been in place for ten years. You may not agree with the law that was passed back then but Section 1031 isn't adding anything new and exciting. "But, wait!" I hear the shout, 1031 is different. Right you are. Here are the people subject to trial, transfer, or detention under 1031:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
They've added al-Qaeda and the Taliban as covered persons. So, if you're a person who fights with or supports these terrorist organizations you are now covered when you weren't specifically covered before. Will someone show me why this bill is such a sudden change in policy and a disaster for freedom? I'd be happy to change my mind.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 
you need to go back and read the "P" Act , there is no Constitution, this Bill, S.1867 just gives the "P" Act teeth to take the final bite of our freedoms, and what was left of or rights, why do think the TSA has the right to grope and detain you, the NSA has the right to monitor your emails and other " E" forms of communication, or the DHS deem you a threat just by taking a photo. With out a warrant or just cause this is not Constitutional, but they get a way with it! Why because it supersedes the Constitution.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Everyone is so revved up....Have ANY of you read Sec. 1032 of S.1867???? IF YOU READ THE BILL, you would understand what is trying to be done. OR, would like to have a Terrorist Bomber let out on Bail. The Military MUST be allowed to handle "Enemy Combatants" and "Foreign Terrorist", they cannot be allowed to enter the American Justice System. The American Justice System is NOT equipped to handle "Foreign Terrorist." Do you want your family protected from a terrorist by existing DAs and Attorneys or would you feel safer IF the Military had custody of the terrorist??? I am a former Marine...I say let the Military handle the them....that's what makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.

Your Liberty is not in question with S.1867, it's your safety. READ THE BILL Sec. 1032 and you'll see. Extremist are FLOODING into the U.S. because of Political Correctness and the people in Washington looking the other way. We must be prepared for our enemies HERE AND NOW, next week or next month may be too late.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 
for it is to vague , lets say the OWS goes on to march on DC , with out any intent of violence, under this Bill's amendment, not the Bill as a whole, gives the authority to have the US armed forces move in as crowed control, now do you think that Senate or House of reps or the POTUS will let them have a sit in ???, NO, I do not think so, they will be deemed a threat to National security and treated as such, same if Glean Beck decided to have have a march on DC. A threat to National Security as in the amendment is any one whom the law,er amendment deems as such, by any action taken against the USA.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
this might wake people up or then maybe not from the Bill S.1867

SEC. 1607. ENHANCEMENT OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO THE UNITED STATES NORTHERN COMMAND AND OTHER COMBATANT COMMANDS.

(a) Commands Responsible for Support to Civil Authorities in the United States.--The United States Northern Command and the United States Pacific Command shall be the combatant commands of the Armed Forces that are principally responsible for the support of civil authorities in the United States by the Armed Forces.

(b) Discharge of Responsibility.--In discharging the responsibility set forth in subsection (a), the Commander of the United States Northern Command and the Commander of the United States Pacific Command shall each--

(1) in consultation with and acting through the Chief of the National Guard Bureau and the Joint Force Headquarters of the National Guard of the State or States concerned, assist the States in the employment of the National Guard under State control, including National Guard operations conducted in State active duty or under title 32, United States Code; and

(2) facilitate the deployment of the Armed Forces on active duty under title 10, United States Code, as necessary to augment and support the National Guard in its support of civil authorities when National Guard operations are conducted under State control, whether in State active duty or under title 32, United States Code.

This in it self is not constitutional


edit on 29-11-2011 by bekod because: editting



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I might get attacked on this for this post but here it goes if americans are cought fighting with the taliban or Al qada in afgan or els where then they should get the same fate



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
Better yet, who exactly are they considering terrorists now?


This is what I mean many were for the patriot act and full observation with drones/BLIMPS* in SOME foreign regionS and couldnt even see the lay out for the test and prototype and now the real AGENDA IS SET UP. SMH
edit on 11/29/11 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Udall's Amendment has failed.

edit on 29-11-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 
does not surprise me one bit, this will pass and it will make the P act look like a parking ticket manual, this is the end of the US as we knew it get ready for hole new ball game, just a matter of time now before they come knocking on doors asking if such and such made this call or posted this on face book or on this site, let alone some comments on Yahoo.



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Actually people have this wrong. The sections people think allows for the detention of US citizens is a figment of someones imagination.

section 1031 and 1032 of the Defense Authorization Bill deals specifically with terrorist, al queida and the Taliban, as well as those who provide material support.

In section 1032 it specifically addresses the authority of the military to detain these people. The military is NOT authorized to deal with a US citizen. It does not allow them to detain, hold, arrest etc.

S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

The ACLU issued a warning, and several websites are claiming this act, for lack of better wording, removes the Posse Commitatus Act, allowing the Federal military the ability to arrest and detain American citizens without charge or trial.

The ACLU pointed out several sections in the bill that they claim does this.
Text of bill table of cotents
Section 1031 and 1032 - The text that people claim strips rights

In the first part below, it spells out who is covered under the section. In this case it is Al Queida and Taliban and those who provide material support. On the off chance one of those individuals is an American - move down to section 1032.


SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.
(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(e) Requirement for Briefings of Congress- The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be `covered persons' for purposes of subsection (b)(2).



Section 1032 - pay attention because this is where the confusion is coming in.

Section 1032 - pay attention because this is where the confusion is coming in.


SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined--
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.
(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

............................


Emphesis added by me.
edit on 29-11-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy"
- James Madison



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Of course you are 100% correct.

But articles like this one are not helping matters:

The Washington Times
Tuesday, November 29, 2011


Defying a veto threat from President Obama, the Senate voted Tuesday to preserve language that would give the U.S. military a crack at al Qaeda operatives captured in the U.S., even if they are American citizens.

Led by Sen. Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, senators voted 61-37 to preserve the language that gives the military custody of al Qaeda suspects, rather than turning them over to law enforcement officials.

“We are at war with al Qaeda and people determined to be part of al Qaeda should be treated as people who are at war with us,” Mr. Levin said.

He and Arizona Sen. John McCain, the ranking Republican on his committee, had struck a deal earlier this month on giving the military priority custody, while allowing the administration to waive that and give civilian authorities priority if it deems the waiver in the interests of national security.


Wheeew!

Senate defies Obama veto threat in terrorist custody vote

I am beginning to wonder if all this is just political grandstanding.

Not much legislation is going to pass as long as the Repubs and Dems are not a majority ruling party.

in the meantime, they continue to collect salaries and fees....at OUR expense !!



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


This may be of interest to those wondering whether or not this bill applies to U.S. Citizens.
Edit To Add: See you around the FEMA camp...

Paul vs McCain Debate: Detaining American Citizens Indefinitely (VIDEO)
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by CALGARIAN
started on 11/29/2011 @ 05:53 PM


Originally posted by CALGARIAN


McCain fell short of actually answering Rand Paul's question in a straightforward manner, but I think we get the jist of it.
edit on 11/29/2011 by this_is_who_we_are because: ETA



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Specifically only the REQUIREMENT to detain does not apply to US citizens.

Read - They CAN detain you but are not required to!!!

So who gets to determine if YOU are acting as an enemy to the US??

A judge and jury? NO!

Do you get a chance to clear your name of these accusations in court? NO!

YOU can be wisked away to some secret location indefinitely with no charges brought forward and no trial because someone in the executive branch accuses you of being an enemy of the US!!

No more constitution ....

Edit: this is the most outrageous assault on our rights I have ever witnessed ... we ARE the new nazi germany!

edit on 29-11-2011 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by MegaMind
 


When you get a minute, you might want to look at Section 1036 of the act. Here's part of it:

(b) Elements of Procedures- The procedures required by this section shall provide for the following in the case of any unprivileged enemy belligerent who will be held in long-term detention under the law of war pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force:

(1) A military judge shall preside at proceedings for the determination of status of an unprivileged enemy belligerent .

(2) An unprivileged enemy belligerent may, at the election of the belligerent , be represented by military counsel at proceedings for the determination of status of the belligerent.


So, we've seen that Sec. 1032 doesn't apply to US citizens, and 1031 is no change from a law we've had for ten years. (Except for adding al-Qaeda and the Taliban.) Even if a Taliban chief gets picked up in Cleveland with a bomb, he still gets a hearing with a military lawyer and judge.

Yes, people get a hearing, and as much as some posters would like it to be, the US is not Nazi Germany.






top topics



 
207
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join