It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Senate votes to pass defense authorization bill that includes a new policy for detaining, trying ter

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Was watching CNN and this text appeared across the top of the screen.

Senate votes 93-7 to pass defense authorization bill that includes a new policy for detaining, trying terror suspects.

No links yet. Will update as they become available.



The bill passed overwhelmingly 93-7, following an agreement reached late Thursday afternoon to add compromise language on the detention of U.S. citizens and terror suspects on U.S. soil.

Now the Defense bill goes to conference committee with the House, which had its own language on detaining terror suspects that must be reconciled with the Senate version.

It is not clear whether the change will satisfy the White House, which has threatened to veto the Defense bill over the detainee provisions.


The Hill

The Washington Post
edit on 1-12-2011 by isthisreallife because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by isthisreallife
 


Hmmm...wonder what this means on the domestic front...I will check back for links and stay tuned.

This could pan out to be not so good for us "domestic terrorists" also called conspiracy theorists.


We'll be the first rounded up and imprisoned for our "thoughts"!



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
The bill itself hasn't actually been passed yet. If you check thomas.gov and type s1867 in the bill number search its current status is listed as "cloture" meaning that a movement to end debate on the bill has been agreed upon and it will move forward to either be signed or vetoed by the president...

I guess all that we need to do now is sit back and watch, hopefully this piece of s*** gets tossed...

edit on 1-12-2011 by tonimackaroni because: typos



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   

“Senator McCain, Senator Graham and I have argued on this floor that there's nothing in our bill, nothing, which changes the rights of United States citizens,” Levin said. “There was no intent to do it.”

The Hill...

This was kind of an interesting statement made....just thought I would share it!

Thanks for the links OP...still reading through them...interesting to see where this goes...it should be tossed...but at this stage of the game anything is possible!



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by isthisreallife
 


93% of the Senate is made up of traitors.....:shk:



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by isthisreallife
 


Passing 93-7 is a VERY bad sign. That means both parties have agreed to this essentially. And if both parties in the senate agree, it seems the house would be following in a similar direction.

If congress passes this, but Obama vetoes it, will Obama suddenly be praised for this? And if it goes down this way, do you think it is all a ruse (rouse?) to keep Obama around?

Personally, if a large majority of congress wants this, do you think Obama will go against it? I don't think so. Someone today posted an excerpt from the Council on Foriegn Relation's handbook and it specifically said the plan is to bring down nations sovereignties to rebuild as one.

I think this is gonna happen. The gears are in full speed now.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by isthisreallife
 


Dear isthisreallife,

93% of our Senate believe that the Constitution does not matter. 93% of our Senate represent 1% of our population and it isn't you or I. 93% of our Senate is traitors to the constitution. 93% of our Senate is willing to have the President call you a "terrorist", arrest you, put you in jail for as long as they want and never have a trial. This may be why the media cannot understand the complaints of the Tea Party or Occupy Movements, because 93% of our Senate do not care what we the people think. Peace.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SunnyDee
 


Dear SunnyDee,



Passing 93-7 is a VERY bad sign. That means both parties have agreed to this essentially. And if both parties in the senate agree, it seems the house would be following in a similar direction.


It is worse than that, if the house passes it with the same ratio then they can override the Presidents veto.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SunnyDee
 


I don't think that Obama will veto this. He's nothing but a banker puppet, so one would expect him to be in full support of this. I'm curious as to how much media coverage this will get. I would expect the media to black it out completely, and the corrupt politicians to support it and try to pass it as fast as possible.

If Obama vetoes it, that will just confuse the hell out of me. It would be like.....a puzzle enthusiast having a puzzle 95% completed, and there's a big section with one piece missing that he is about to put down, but instead he grabs a lighter and burns it. Bad analogy, but you get what I'm saying.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by tonimackaroni
 


Then the bill has been passed. If its waiting for Obama to sign it. It will become law once signed. If there are that many in Congress that have voted to do away with charges, trials and court proceeedings, If there are that many that agreed to arrest of the American citizens by the military. Then they have declared war on the american people and we are now all enemy combatants. All I can say is what comes around goes around. They are now attempting or have already included that torture is legal. The US is the only country I know of on the planeet that not only agrees that there is no such thing as human rights but has actually put it in writing. They have risen to a new time high as historical criminals.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
So its up to the President to choose - Play the puppet or be a President for the people.

Ah choice, the foundation of free will. Even if for some reason Obama pulls some Humanity out of his a** and VETO, TPTB would simply backhand him - give a chuckle and say "Do you feel better? Now, do as we said: SIGN IT!"

All jokes aside, this really is serious. We all can be terrorist at any given moment now. Ponder that...




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


Obama has said he will veto though if it makes it through the House.

Now, with 93% of the vote in the Senate....if that translates at all over to the House....his veto won't matter.

Maybe that's why Obama has said he will veto. It will be a good campaign point, and it will show a "decisive" leader without actually having to go against a bill that attempts to strip away the Constitution.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by redrose123
 


I stand corrected; I guess it was just wishful thinking on my end, but why would I be so stupid as to give the benefit of the doubt that maybe, just maybe the president would realize how ridiculous this b/s is... What is this country coming to, seriously? How the hell is it that we have gotten to this level of control?

A part of me really wants to refuse this s*** is happening, but no, it really is... un(insert obvious word manipulation)believable. This in combination with the PATRIOT s*** not only destroys multiple amendments 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, etc... but it also severely hinders the 1st and 2nd. It's because of this crap that Americans now have to live in fear of what they say, and it will most definitely add a nice subliminal level of gun control since citizens will obviously be deterred from purchasing arms for fear of being labeled "suspicious" by the government.

It appears as if our freedoms will soon be completely wiped off the face of the map, and this infuriates me beyond belief... Our forefathers would take a dump on this legislation, this is the same kinda crap we fought against during the revolution, the same kinda crap that can draw serious comparison to the Third Reich which sparked WWII. Here we go baby, it's only a matter of time...

Enjoy the ride to socialism, everybody!



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
The se7en that said Nay

Sen. Thomas Coburn [R, OK] Nay
Sen. Thomas Harkin [D, IA] Nay
Sen. Mike Lee [R, UT] Nay
Sen. Jeff Merkley [D, OR] Nay
Sen. Rand Paul [R, KY] Nay
Sen. Bernard Sanders [I, VT] Nay
Sen. Ron Wyden [D, OR] Nay

glad my state said no



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   
I think this is all a set-up so that President Obama can veto the bill, thereby saving the American citizen from military arrest. The Dem's will then use this as a slingshot to re-elect Obama.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by tonimackaroni
The bill itself hasn't actually been passed yet. If you check thomas.gov and type s1867 in the bill number search its current status is listed as "cloture" meaning that a movement to end debate on the bill has been agreed upon and it will move forward to either be signed or vetoed by the president...


You are still incorrect actually. The bill passed the Senate just recently and the House bill passed earlier (May 26th) -- Now the bills must be consolidated and presented to the President as a single bill.

So there is hope still that the House will stand up against this language (highly doubtful) and reconciliation cannot be found on common ground.

Remember -- Each House can create the bills, but in order for them to reach the president -- if two bills of a similar nature exist within each of the respective Houses -- then the bills must be reconciled (not combined; rather be passed with the same language and amendments). That is the stage we are at now.

And for reference, a cloture vote is when the floor agrees to end the debate on the bill and move forward with a final vote.
edit on 1-12-2011 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2011 by ownbestenemy because: Fixed House pass date



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by isthisreallife
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


Obama has said he will veto though if it makes it through the House.

Now, with 93% of the vote in the Senate....if that translates at all over to the House....his veto won't matter.

Maybe that's why Obama has said he will veto. It will be a good campaign point, and it will show a "decisive" leader without actually having to go against a bill that attempts to strip away the Constitution.


Yeah but with numbers that high -- there is a strong chance that the veto will be null and void with an override back in Congress. Tis scary but there is still hope that during reconciliation of the two bills -- from each respective House -- that the language is neutered or removed; wishful thinking is night time trait of mine.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:11 PM
link   
If Obama signs this bill then it could be the change he was talking about! He never said it would be good change, did he?

Obama supporters should be pleased



Originally posted by EvilBat
The se7en that said Nay

Sen. Thomas Coburn [R, OK] Nay
Sen. Thomas Harkin [D, IA] Nay
Sen. Mike Lee [R, UT] Nay
Sen. Jeff Merkley [D, OR] Nay
Sen. Rand Paul [R, KY] Nay
Sen. Bernard Sanders [I, VT] Nay
Sen. Ron Wyden [D, OR] Nay

glad my state said no


I do love that Paul clan.

Ron Paul 2012 or bust!
edit on 1-12-2011 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy


Yeah but with numbers that high -- there is a strong chance that the veto will be null and void with an override back in Congress. Tis scary but there is still hope that during reconciliation of the two bills -- from each respective House -- that the language is neutered or removed; wishful thinking is night time trait of mine.


I was saying the same thing. I believe that Obama could use a nullified veto to his advantage later on in the campaign trail. That is why he would veto it, not necessarily because he disagrees with it.

If you're wishful thinking I can't blame you. I was just hoping the MSM would pick it up and run with it....



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I just found this, after reading the news about this, it said that there was a policy added

Washington (CNN) -- The Senate on Thursday passed a giant defense bill that includes a new policy for detaining and trying suspected al Qaeda terrorists -- a policy that attracted controversy during the debate and may draw a presidential veto.

CNN LINK

That said, I found this on this other website that said this...
see where it says updated, it says voted down...

my question is, was that the policy CNN was talking about but failed to add that these new amendments were voted down?, Im sorry Im still learning about all this and truly am confused. Thanks.

UPDATE: Roll Call's for both amendments are listed below the fold.

A vote could occur today on two amendments introduced to prevent the indefinite detention of American citizens as currently written into the National Defense Authorization Act, S. 1867.

Senate Amendment (SA) 1126 would "clarify" Section 1031 to explicitly state within the section that the authority of the military to detain persons without trial until the end of hostilities does not apply to American citizens. [Update: Voted down 45-55]

SA 1125 would limit the mandatory detention provision in Section 1032 to persons captured abroad, not in America. [Update: Voted down, 45-55]

While there are certainly still problems with the indefinite detention of any persons without trial in a seemingly endless "war on terror," both of these amendments will remove the worst offending provisions against American citizens and prevent turning America into a battlefield.

Contact your senators ASAP at 202-224-3121 to demand they support SA 1125 & 1126 to the National Defense Authorization Act, S. 1867 to prevent the indefinite detention of American citizens.

Below is a list of senators C4L has identified as targets for these amendments, if you live in their state, definitely make sure you contact them immediately!
Corker (TN) 202-224-3344
Murkowski (AK) 202-224-6665
Johnson (WI) 202-224-5323
Heller (NV) 202-224-6244
Snowe (ME) 202-224-5344
Toomey (PA) 202-224-4254
Lugar (IN) 202-224-4814
Rubio (FL) 202-224-3041

link to above cut and paste




top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join