Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial

[Jackson]

Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial

The Senate is set to vote on a bill today that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

“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. 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,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.

» Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (GovTrack.us)

Sponsor: Sen. Carl Levin [D-MI]

Status: This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole. Explanation: Although it has been placed on a calendar of business, the order in which legislation is considered and voted on is determined by the majority party leadership. Keep in mind that sometimes the text of one bill is incorporated into another bill, and in those cases the original bill, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned.

[Last Updated: Nov 19, 2011 6:12AM]

Worrisome???

 

[MoistTrout]

Not right away, but maybe eventually. When you give the government that kind of power it's only a matter of time before someone will abuse it.

 

[diptherio]

Being sponsored by Levin (D) and McCain (R). This is bi-partisan tyranny. Wake up all you die-hard Republicans and Democrats, both parties have their share of repressive a$$holes. Senate is set to vote on this Today. Call your senators and tell them to remove these provisions from the NDAA!

 

[waltky]

The Posse Comitatus Showdown...

Senate rejects amendment to delay detainee provisions for further study
November 30, 2011 WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama and Congress are on a collision course over legislation that essentially would require certain terrorism suspects to be held in military custody, and a veto threat appeared to have no effect.

The White House argues that such a law would limit flexibility in handling such cases and erect walls between law enforcement agencies that authorities have been trying to dismantle since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. But on Tuesday, the Senate disregarded Obama's veto threat and rejected an amendment to the defense bill from Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., that would have shelved the detainee provisions until a study could be conducted. "The least we can do is take our time, be diligent and hear from those who will be affected by these new significant changes in how we interrogate and prosecute terrorists," Udall said on the Senate floor.

The Udall amendment drew support from civil liberties groups but was defeated on a rare bipartisan vote, 60-38. Fifteen Democrats and one independent joined almost all Republicans to uphold the detainee provisions. Two Republicans - Sen. Rand Paul, of Kentucky and Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois - along with 35 Democrats and one independent voted to strip the provisions. Two senators did not vote. "After a decade of settled jurisprudence on detention authority, Congress must be careful not to open a whole new series of legal questions that will distract from our efforts to protect the country," the White House wrote in a message to congressional leaders earlier this month. The defense bill is must-pass legislation covering a wide range of Pentagon policy. It sets annual pay for the troops, funding levels for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and commits to weapons systems and other military contracts. The Democratic chairman of the conservative-leaning Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, has led efforts to preserve the GOP-backed detainee provisions, leaving the administration at odds with key Capitol Hill allies.

More than 200 amendments await the bill, and the Senate expects to work its way through some of them this week. The detainee provisions, which have drawn the most debate, come after the Armed Services Committee reworked that section to try to address the administration's concerns. Supporters argued that the provisions merely put into law the government's ability to detain terror suspects, as has been done since the 2001 terror attacks. The legislation also grants the administration greater authority to use military custody, rather than civilian law enforcement and courts. "We are at war with al-Qaida, and people determined to be part of al-Qaida should be treated as people who are at war with us," Levin said. Tuesday's vote came after former Vice President Dick Cheney, a leading architect of detainee policies under President George W. Bush, attended a weekly GOP Senate luncheon where the issues sparked a robust debate in the closed session, according to senators who attended. Cheney did not speak during the discussion.

Civil libertarians warn that the detainee provisions are political grandstanding as the presidential election year looms, and give the government far-reaching power to patrol U.S. streets and detain U.S. citizens indefinitely. "The defense authorization bill has very dangerous provisions," said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel at the ACLU. Because two-thirds of Congress would be needed to override a veto, he noted that the 37 Senate votes for the Udall amendment "show the president could sustain a veto if it came to that." If the defense bill is approved, it would be merged with a House-passed version that also drew a veto threat from the White House.

Source

 

[Truthseeker420]

We all should be outraged by this.

 

[rambo2]

Such a nice one.Thanks for sharing.Keep it up.

 

[Katzndogz]

The sole authority rests with the president. There is no judicial review. Even if the democrats trust obama that implicitly, what about future presidents who have the same power? It seems that the possibility was not considered or considered and rejected in favor of no president subsequent to obama.

 

[B94]

See what Paul Craig Roberts had to say -

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEMDX2iuHyI]Paul Craig Roberts: We have a republican party that is a Gestapo party - YouTube[/ame]

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - the Fearless Duo (Obama an' Bush) done whupped dem terrorists...

America Wins War On Terror
Dec 3rd, 2011 | American citizens are celebrating in the streets as their government snatched final victory in the War on Terror on 1 Dec. 2011 — through a maneuver that used legislative brilliance rather than bullets.

The moment of victory came when 61 senators passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2012 that allows the indefinite military detention on American soil of American citizens who are merely suspected of having connections to terrorism. To understand the genius of this legislation, some background is necessary. The Patriot Act, passed before the dust of the collapsed World Trade Center had settled, had already removed the fourth amendment rights of Americans to privacy, allowing federal authorities access to the private affairs of individuals without any court oversight. That act had also removed their rights under the first amendment to free speech, by making it illegal, for example, for one American to tell another that he has been served with a warrant under the Patriot Act — not, of course, a warrant issued by a court, but by a federal officer who can now write his own warrants without any judicial oversight.

What Senators McCain (R, Arizona) and Levin (D, Michigan), and those who voted for the legislation that they sponsored, cleverly realized, however, is that since the terrorists are attacking America for its freedoms and “way of life”, the only sure way to win the war is to eliminate all of those freedoms and way of life so that the terrorists will have no further reason to fight. (This is why the comprehensive laws that already exist in the USA that make the aiding and abetting of any terrorist organization or activity a crime, but leave untouched the inalienable rights of American citizens, simply do not suffice.)

For that reason, on December 1, an amendment to the aforementioned National Defense Authorization Act that would seek to preserve the very last freedom of Americans — to receive due process, including the right to a trial by jury, as required in the Constitution, before being detained by the state — was defeated, ensuring that no American freedom, and therefore no reason for the terrorists to hate America — any longer exists. Now, and thankfully for those who wish to defend the American values of peace and freedom, Americans can be detained by the military without trial or limitation.

The achievement of the U.S. Congress is all the greater in the light of the United States’ own Department of Defense study, headed by Robert Pape of the University of Chicago, that collected and analyzed huge amounts of data on suicide terrorism — which is 12 times more dangerous than other forms of terrorism when measured by the number of people killed per act. In this U.S. government study, speakers of the local languages of the families of suicide bombers were sent to speak with family members of the terrorists to gain as much information as possible about the context and the people involved, and the database thus obtained on suicide terrorism is, as far as we know, the most comprehensive in the world.

MORE