Senate bill 1867

Discussion in 'Politics' started by uscitizen, Apr 12, 2012.

  1. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    With so much information (and “disinformation”) floating around the internet regarding the passage of Senate Bill 1867 (the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, for fiscal year 2012), I felt it necessary to post this article. The NDAA regularly comes before Congress for changes and additions, but Senate Bill 1867 proves to be the most powerful one yet in trampling the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    Let me ask you a question. Can the president use the military to arrest anyone he wants, keep that person away from a judge and jury, and lock him up for as long as he wants? According to Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, “In the Senate’s dark and terrifying vision of the Constitution, he can.” Two weeks ago, during Thanksgiving week, while the typical American was comatose in front of the television, watching countless hours of football and recuperating from the gluttony that accompanies this holiday, Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) met in secret and drafted an amendment to the NDAA bill. This amendment was then passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing.


    What was in this amendment?
    In a nutshell, this amendment permits the President to use the U.S. military against American citizens in the USA. He would have the legal (not lawful) authority to arrest, detain, imprison, torture (or conduct “enhanced interrogation” if you prefer the government’s semantic work-around), and even kill ANYONE he wishes (including a U.S. citizen) without even charging him with a crime! And that person, under this disturbing bill, would have no recourse to a judge to require the President to either set him free or file charges against him. This would all be accomplished via military tribunal (rather than civilian court). Military tribunals are the complete antithesis of the civilian justice system, and putting American citizens through such a system would signal the death of everything the American justice system was built upon.



    WeAreChangeTV.US

    the senate vote was 93-7.
     
  2. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    I knew this was too serious for most of those who complain of constitutional rights being erroded.
    And both partys are to blame.
     
  3. hortysir
    Offline

    hortysir In Memorial of 47

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    20,459
    Thanks Received:
    4,027
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Lakeland, FL
    Ratings:
    +6,296
    How does it stand in the House?

    And what happened to citing constitutional precedent prior to passage of a new bill?
     
  4. Avorysuds
    Offline

    Avorysuds Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    13,834
    Thanks Received:
    1,655
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Eugene Oregon
    Ratings:
    +2,141
    But US, do you plan on voting for Obama, the guy who put his name on this?
     
  5. Ed Spacer
    Offline

    Ed Spacer BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,986
    Thanks Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    georgia
    Ratings:
    +208
    I have no problem with NDAA being used WITH PROFILING against islamofacist and terrorist affiliated groups.
    had profiling been allowed,and the proper antiterrorism methods used so the proper people are dealt with,instead of catering to CAIR and the other groups,this wouldnt be a topic of discussion.
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2012
  6. Ed Spacer
    Offline

    Ed Spacer BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,986
    Thanks Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    georgia
    Ratings:
    +208
    In fact,after 9/11,i know ill draw flack from it,but i supported interrment camps for any terrorism affiliated group.
     
  7. Immanuel
    Offline

    Immanuel Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    16,823
    Thanks Received:
    2,210
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +2,224
    And what will you do when they start targetting vampires?

    Immie
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    I will likely not vote for anyone for president as none are deserving of my vote.
    I was seriously going to vote for Mitt, however someone pointed out the liklihood of him nominating supremes during his term..
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2012
  9. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Umm 97 senators put their name on this first. Had thye not then Obama would not have had this ammendment to put his name on now would he?

    Ignore that the republicans in the senate overwhelmingly supported this.
     
  10. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    I think he should research this a bit, it has no real limitations on it's useage if the president pushes it.
    He says you are a threat and you are held indefinately without trial, etc.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page