Posted on 11/25/2011 3:06:35 PM PST by Errant
Remember that debate between Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich, where Mr. Gingrich suggested we should expand and strengthen the Patriot Act in the name of protecting US citizens from terrorists? Mr. Gingrich indicated that there exists a line between criminal law and the war on terror, and that we need not worry the government will overstep its bounds.
While Americans enjoy the Thanksgiving weekend and join the annual running of the bulls celebration at malls and retail outlets, something sinister is taking place in Congress – and it should scare the hell out of you. If the President and Senate have their way, your front lawn will soon become a battlefield, and you’ll be subjected to military, not criminal, law.
From the ACLU Via The Daily Sheeple:
The Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.
The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.
The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.
I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?
This is happening right now – IN AMERICA! A law that is designed to specifically bypass Constitutional protections and one that will undoubtedly be used against the American people to further advance and expand the national police state.
Once signed into law the President (or anyone of his minions within the Justice Department or Homeland Security acting on his behalf) can issue orders to arrest, detain and imprison an American citizen in the United States without due process. Since most terror arrests fall into the realm of national security, and therefore are secret, no evidence would ever need to be presented for the permanent detainment (and who knows what else) of an American imprisoned under this law.
I looked at the ACLU site regarding the Defense Act and was astounded by the number of amendments. What a mess! It would take a month of Sundays to go through all of them.
I know it's a bummer of a thing to happen, but that's the way war is conducted, and if the gub'mnt cain't do it, then we citizens need to be authorized to carry it out as we see fit.
Lak' ah said, they's dead meat!
Yah heyah?
“Hope you’re right sergeant...”
I am right, Errant. Levin is my Senator, and the fat, commie slob hasn’t had the guts to show his fat, commie face in my congressional district for 18 years. I live in hard-core, rural gun country. He’s scared shitless. This legislation is nothing more than a feel-good law to make Levin believe he has some modicum of the military to protect his fat, useless life.
He doesn’t.
Cheers, FRiend.
Looky here, Defense money for HILLARY TO SPEND:
“SEC. 1207. GLOBAL SECURITY CONTINGENCY FUND.
(a) Establishment- There is established on the books of the Treasury of the United States an account to be known as the `Global Security Contingency Fund’.
(b) Authority- Amounts in the Fund shall be available to either the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to provide assistance to countries designated by the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Defense...
Funds available to the Department of State for foreign assistance may be transferred to the Fund by the Secretary of State. Funds available to the Department of Defense may be transferred to the Fund by the Secretary of Defense in accordance with established procedures for reprogramming under section 1001 of this Act and successor provisions of law. Amounts transferred under this paragraph shall be merged with funds made available under this section and remain available until expended as provided in subsection (i) for the purposes specified in subsection (b).
(2) LIMITATION- The total amount of funds appropriated and transferred to the Fund in any fiscal year shall not exceed $300,000,000. This limitation does not apply to amounts contributed to the Fund under subsection (h)...
(h) Authority To Accept Gifts- The Secretary of State may use money, funds, property, and services accepted pursuant to the authority of section 635(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2395(d)) to fulfill the purposes of subsection (b).”
Tll that to the two AMericans killed recently by the missle strike.
And I know and agree with what you are saying, but Rush has spoken twice on his show about this panel and that here is NO oversight whatsoever......So if you want to agrue call Rush...
WAR is “due process of law”. It always was and always will be.
Well, dear friends, if a military panel can presently declare the death penalty upon a declared terrorist, does it not stand to reason it would take only one small step to do the same to our citizenry. Actually that step has already been in effect much longer than any of us would like to believe. Perhaps not in a constitutional manner but it has been taken nonetheless. We know that under Obama, in particular, the U.S. Constitution has been dismissed as have the laws and court decisions they wish to disregard. Most any area of laws, regulations and tradition affecting this republic has been violated by the Obama administration. I am no legal or constitutional scholar but common sense and casual observance tell me this.
You say it’s a low volume ping. I’m surprised really. Didn’t know you had this ping until now, but seems to me there’s one “H” of a lot more involvement with agenda 21 than people think. The UN IS the major tool of the Marxists since its inception, and the Marxists are on the march Worldwide right now, today.
IMO just about everything we suffer today is related to the UN agenda for the 21st Century, or indirectly so. Right down to local community confusion.
Yeah put me on that list please. Appreciate it.
No, the bill’s not as described.
Yes.things have gotten worse here. Some government oddicial is involved in more aspects of our life than ever. But viewing it from overseas it must look worse than it is.
Not ironic to me at all. Freedoms are new in the Czech Republic, old in America- and familiarity breeds contempt (sigh...).
Drafted in secret.....Carl Levin, and John McCain eh.
Wouldn’t doubt it.
sfl
Never underestimate the power of stupidity when it comes to holders of political office they are politicians not statesmen. The difference is profound.
It seems like the Oathkeepers may be America’s last line of defense, refusing to carry out unconstitutional orders against American citizens.
That is, assuming that each and every one of them that signed on isn’t immediately RIF’ed, because of “budget cutbacks”. Makes you wonder how many American soldiers are willing to “obey orders” and fire on American civilians?
It's astounding to me that so many in Washington, who have sworn to uphold the constitution, can look the other way rather than put up a fuss.
No doubt that these individuals deserved what they got. As citizens according to our law, their faith should have been decided by a court (even if in absence) instead of by some secret panel and current resident of the WH.
The Rubicon crossed, we're marching to Rome with a new set of rules.
“Makes you wonder how many American soldiers are willing to “obey orders” and fire on American civilians?”
I can tell you from my perspective - Levin is my senator and I’m a sergeant - that the overwhelming majority of American troops are willing to fire on that traitorous SOB.
Sleep well, FRiend. We got you covered.
Then what would you have ~ well, it'd be a combatant running about loose who wanted to kill you.
The Fifth Amendment is for criminals ~ not for enemy combatants.
Used to be declared as such. Now we have WOT that allows for considerable mission creep.
Circumventing the supreme law of the land, secret panels and our dear leader are deciding whether citizens are patriots or terrorists and then deciding and applying the penalty.
So here we have Congress considering allowing indefinite detention of those deemed a threat by those in power.
You don't see a problem here?
Posse Comitatus.
Not that the law means anything to America’s leaders anymore.
And what are the magic words when THEY attack us first?
Well I’m glad to hear it because it was reported all over the place that the kid was being held incognito for months.
Sounds like he got just about the right punishment for the crime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.