December 16, 201114 yr http://www.fox19.com/story/16336829/reality-check-it-was-the-obama-administration-that-demanded-power-to-detain-us-citizens-indefinately-under-ndaa No due process, U.S. citizens can be detained indefinitely without charges filed against them, without a trial, US citizens can be sent overseas prisons without charges filed. " the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section?" "The majority of Americans may be asleep on this, may have no idea what's happening even as so many of your rights are being taken away." And remember, this is a Fox affiliate that says Sec 1031 and Sce 1032 are to broad, and that US citizens could be detained for no reason. Obama signs the bill on Monday.
December 16, 201114 yr Author The majority of Americans are asleep on most all of Obamas policies..This was veto proof as well. To me it is not just about Obama or if you are a republican or democrat, it's about how ALL in DC are performing, and their record low approval ratings shows this all too well.
December 16, 201114 yr Wow!! Can't believe Clyde's not jumping in to defend Obama on this.............. Yet.
December 16, 201114 yr At least the Patriot Act did not legalize a laser guided drone missile from being dropped on you in your own backyard. This does, basically. This makes every US citizen subject to a death sentence or arrest for an an unlimited time by its own military without trial within the US borders. So much for due process or other constitutional safeguards. Covered persons: (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. I had to look up "belligerent act" as that sounds somewhat nebulous. Here is what is what popped up: http://www.alternet.org/rights/146081/mccain_and_lieberman%27s_%22enemy_belligerent%22_act_could_set_u.s._on_path_to_military_dictatorship Three years after Obama eloquently opposed the Military Commissions Act, the now-president signed a Military Commissions Act of his own, as part of the 2010 Defense Authorization Bill. The law, which sought to overhaul the discredited Bush-era military commissions for "alien enemy combatants," introduced what is apparently turning out to be an important new term to the counterterror lexicon: Unprivileged Enemy Belligerent, defined as "an individual who: 1) has engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners; or 2) has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners." At the end of the article: "A close reading of the bill suggests it would allow the U.S. military to detain U.S. citizens without trial indefinitely in the U.S. based on suspected activity." This is a defining characteristic of a military dictatorship. Where's the outrage? And will it come before it's too late? NDAA is a derivative if this original McCain/Lieberman bill. And you can see what the civil libertarians thought that version.
December 16, 201114 yr Author Wow!! Can't believe Clyde's not jumping in to defend Obama on this.............. Yet.Again, it was veto proof.
December 17, 201114 yr Just the way Obama wanted it... So he can play his favorite card. The Blame Card. Uh.Uh Uh Wasn't Uh,Uh my fault Uh Uh It was uh uh veto proof..
December 17, 201114 yr A view from the left.. Has Obama even read the Constitution... Listen to him speak of his legal regime.
December 17, 201114 yr Yet again I'm not legal savvy but how can this be allowed to get this far when it obviously infringes upon the rights given to us in the constitution? This is clearly unconstitutional in every way. Will the judicial system come in and deem it so? This goes back to the days in high school and middle school where we all learned about the checks and balances system in place with our government. However this system seems to have been pushed aside as of late.
December 17, 201114 yr ^ The Constitution isn't magic. It's only useful so long as people are willing to defend it. As soon as we have a government more interested in doing what it wants rather than upholding the rights in that document, it has about as much value as the paper it's printed on.
December 17, 201114 yr Yet again I'm not legal savvy but how can this be allowed to get this far when it obviously infringes upon the rights given to us in the constitution? This is clearly unconstitutional in every way. Will the judicial system come in and deem it so? This goes back to the days in high school and middle school where we all learned about the checks and balances system in place with our government. However this system seems to have been pushed aside as of late. To me it's the next step begun by the Patriot Act. I was upset then, and even more so now.
December 17, 201114 yr To me it's the next step begun by the Patriot Act. I was upset then, and even more so now. Did this come because of the fake Christmas day plane bomber or another fake issue that the Government is passing off as real?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.