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

Originally posted by Mcupobob
So the source you provided lead me to a blog and the blogs source was the Washington post and this bill sounds like nothing you're telling me.

The overall bill totals $663 billion and would authorize spending for military personnel, weapons systems and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The committee had approved the bill in June but met behind closed doors Tuesday to cut about $21 billion to fulfill new budget requirements.

WP

edit on 11/25/2011 by Mcupobob because: (no reason given)

Thank you for providing reason and calm reflection in an otherwise inflammatory thread.
I would recommend to all to do a little reading before jumping to conclusions.
Let's try some sanity folks, before we all grab our weapons and start shooting.

Giuseppe Garibaldi saw it coming. He was offered to lead the union troops against the confederates after having had great success in south America. He would only agree if Lincoln declared the goal to be the liberation of the slaves nothing more nothing less. He saw the ruse that under the just war against slavery, there was the objective to centralise power and control and refused. Now they even stop pretending.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


If any other nation said they had this power in the US, it would be an act of war. So... isn't this a declaration of war by the US against its own citizens? I'm seriously starting to feel that my taxes are funding a war against me now.

There is no reason to waste good tar and feather on these types! Or even waste the energy of a horse to drawn/quarter them.

The Wheel, that's what these traitors to liberty deserve. They are elected to protect our liberties, but with EVERY single vote they're usurping our liberty. The WHEEL for them all!

Derek

As long as the US-Americanos do not understand that there is absolute no difference
between me and a US-Gringo nothing will change because the way how to think
is sick and rotten inside the core,
how do the US Gringos accept that the US-Military can come to my House
(i am a Foreigner with two different Passes and Citizenship in a still foreign Country)
but only get alarmed when they are the next one in this anti-humanitarian Chain?

1933 started with Ignorance, this led to the Ramps of Auschwitz-Birkenau!!!

Is this not equivalent to permanent Martial Law?

Um, could I get some help here. I downloaded the pdf, it looks more like an appropriations bill than anything else.

Not saying anyone is wrong, but I can't find where it says or even alludes to the OP.

Originally posted by beezzer
Um, could I get some help here. I downloaded the pdf, it looks more like an appropriations bill than anything else.

Not saying anyone is wrong, but I can't find where it says or even alludes to the OP.

The OP link is an ACLU site.

They always over sensationalize everything, right or wrong, do or die.

There could be some martial law garb in there, but it's nothing that the POTUS doesn't already have.

I think the U.N. Agenda 21 is a bigger threat........

ACLU Main Page

check the "About Us" link there.

They are good for some reasons, but they DO exaggerate sometimes.

They seem to get some authors that are a bit overboard.

BUT, that's what they call free speech and opinion.

The Martial Law Act of 2006

Martial law is perhaps the ultimate stomping of freedom. And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” — whatever that means.

The Martial Law Act of 2006

read the whole article.

it refers to old laws also.

has this ever been repealed or changed ?

It took only a few paragraphs in a $500 billion, 591-page bill to raze one of the most important limits on federal power. Congress passed the Insurrection Act in 1807 to severely restrict the president’s ability to deploy the military within the United States. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 tightened those restrictions, imposing a two-year prison sentence on anyone who used the military within the United States without the express permission of Congress. (This act was passed after the depredations of the U.S. military throughout the Southern states during Reconstruction.)

But there is a loophole: Posse Comitatus is waived if the president invokes the Insurrection Act.

The Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus Act aim to deter dictatorship while permitting a narrow window for the president to temporarily use the military at home. But the 2006 reforms basically threw any concern about dictatorial abuses out the window.

Where is the ACLU on this ??????

Originally posted by beezzer
Um, could I get some help here. I downloaded the pdf, it looks more like an appropriations bill than anything else.

Not saying anyone is wrong, but I can't find where it says or even alludes to the OP.

I'll trade you the answer for a link to the PDF... I can't find it right now but apparently "section 962" is the one in question.

SEC. 1031. AUTHORITY TO DETAIN UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS CAPTURED PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General- The Armed Forces of the United States are authorized to detain covered persons captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) as unprivileged enemy belligerents pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person, including but not limited to persons for whom detention is required under section 1032, 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) Long-term detention under the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities against the nations, organizations, and persons subject to 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) Constitutional Limitation on Applicability to United States Persons- The authority to detain a person under this section does not extend to the detention of citizens or lawful resident aliens of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

Emphasis mine.

Source

It seems like it doesn't apply to anyone protected by the Constitution.

reply to post by Cuervo

Here you go.

I'll take a look at 962

www.gpo.gov...

reply to post by xuenchen

Thanks. That was my first assumption, but I wanted to read the bill before posting.

I hope to god that one of these intrusional bills will piss Americans off so bad that they DO go to war and reclaim a sense of sanity in their government.

i'm not against government, i'm against a crazy psychotic few who claim to be a government.

restore the Republic please.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Cuervo

 

Here you go.

I'll take a look at 962

www.gpo.gov...

Nevermind... that was about the government using cyberspace as a battleground on a different defense bill. Thanks for the link, I am now just as blissfully lost as you.

Suppose you need to have paperwork to make an current Modus Operandi legal,

Within their own shores,

Its been happening to anyone the US Military wants since 9/11 from every country and nationality in the world anyhow!

To allow it to be more open, expand its initial "experiment"

Allowing the local grunts to do it rather than 3 letter suits,

"Extraordinary Rendition" becomes National Defense Authorization Act!

Welcome to the worldview all Americans that the rest of the world has experienced for decades,

Getting much worse 9/11.

I applaud the outrage and implore all of the good people of the USA to oppose this,

I will not surprised to see lots of resistance to this in the USA, and rightly so, also a feeling of anger at this and the idea that American troops can do this to you.

However they have many times already in history to Americans themselves in America. A big part of the rest of the world though has had this type of behavior and treatment in their own lands to, by the American Military for a very long time.

So that anger and idea, fear even you feel at these proposals as and American has been the experience of millions of people around the world already.

Maybe now you know how it feels?

Well maybe when 5 pairs of size 12's kick in your door at 3 am?

Please consider this as an American, to better understand maybe why the rest of the world may seem to be "Anti-American" or even current and potential "Enemies" or such like.

Be aware how easy it was to, do not forget how easy it is to kick in an Tee-pi door...?

It's not nice when it comes home to roost as such, but maybe a greater understanding lies within it, and even healing of old wounds, and caution on wishing, funding, allowing and praising even their involvement elsewhere?

The recent experiences of the following such actions as this Act will allow, are described and shown below, soon then this could happen in America,

Just imagine now as things are changing quickly around us worldwide in a few months, in your house as you are now go to sleep, went on an OWS march a few months ago forgot about it, or something such like to be on an "list" and WE ALL know how good American Intelligence is re WMD! and this happens to you?

This will mean it comes homes to roost as said, to Americans living in America, Oh and I can tell you one thing for absolute certainty, they have been compiling all sorts of "lists" esp since the..paperclip,,ahem 1940's.

History is the best teacher.

Below is a very shortened extract from an list of all US Military Actions worldwide. Therefore where at the least what this Bill proposes the forceful arrest, detention with no charge, and being held against your will with no legal rights has been endured by these peoples and countries already for an long time.

Why has it been ok up till now for an American tourist to be on holiday in an country and he is special or different, from the actual population of that foreign country to be on Lear Jet at 4 am and being waterboarded by 6am? Or troops doing as the above video?

This is obviously then the point I want to make, the perceptional differences that have existed on all sides, through this comes wisdom on the nature of the issue, we can then come closer and let the barriers down as the real elephant in the living room, is the same one in action in the above videos images etc, as it seems the US and many other Western Governments we have an Conglomerate/Military structure running things and only now people are becoming more aware of it.

Once we know we all have the same enemy, being this type of Military enforced Corporatocracy, with one very dominant player. As is being played out across the Arab world as we speak now The Egyptians saying No again to it, then Mrs Akbar stops disliking Mr Smith, because the illusion and fear based compliance mind control that Mr Smith is the "wicked infidel" becomes plainly not so, and in fact after seeing your own door kicked in you might not think that Mrs Akbar in fact anymore is an "rag head" or is very likely to have semtex strapped to her baby either in the que at Mac D.

When enough people look at elephant in the living room, and tell it a few home basic truths about living in OUR homes, our lands:

1. You are too Big :-)
   
2. Cost Too Much
   
3. Dangerous
   
4. Dont want you Anymore now we realise we don't NEED you to keep us safe from pretend plane hijackers, or devils in the W.House et al
   
5. Enough...just enough already wannabee Nazi's !
   

They cant do it anymore.

Now I was going to add it but it was turning into 3 posts just for the list!

Therefore do look at the source for the complete picture, this is US Military involvement of Kicking in doors at the very minimum since year dot for them not so long ago, God must be said eager caught up on us the old Colonial previous "superpowers"

Kind Regards,
Elf

Originally posted by Kali74

It seems like it doesn't apply to anyone protected by the Constitution.

I'm sure that will come as great comfort to Nasser al-Awlaki.

These people don't need no stinking laws. They write their own in the dead of night, and murder American citizens whenever it takes their fancy. Obama is taking the Bush doctrine of preemption to a whole other level.

reply to post by OldCorp


Al-Alwaki was a self proclaimed al-qaeda operative of his own accord he was an enemy combatant and traitor.

reply to post by Kali74


He never picked up a weapon, he was not a planner of any attacks, and there was no imminent threat to the US. There is no reason why he couldn't have AT LEAST been charged with a crime before being killed. So much for the 5th Amendment.

Look, I have no love for that scumbag whatsoever, but what Obama did was unconstitutional. "NO PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." Ring a bell? The "No person" part is pretty damned clear. It make NO exceptions for anything. As an American citizen, he deserved a trial before being executed. Period.

reply to post by Kali74
Thanks for finding that.

Now my question. Why would the ACLU run such a hysterical piece?