• 62 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

while we were partying for the new year our government officially passed a bill that shreds the bill of rights.

yup the USA is now a "battleground".

www.huffingtonpost.com%2F2011%2F12%2F31%2Fobama-defense-bill_n_1177836.html&h=FAQEPT_In

the usa can now detain you without trial or charges for any amount of time and to make matters worst they just labeled the occupy movement a terrorist movement because they are going against the government (there goes our freedom of speech??). the rumors are already circulating that people have been disappearing.

the real slap in the face for me is the fact that obama, who claimed to be against this idea and who criticized bush for ruining america earilyer, went on in a press release that he thinks NDAA will be better for america. whats stopping him from passing SOPA now?

thoughts about the end of the american ideal?

#1 Edited by The Man of Yesteryear (5502 posts) - - Show Bio

What the . . . I thought Obama said he was going to veto it?

#2 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@The Man of Yesteryear said:

What the...I thought Obama said he was going to veto it?

he turned on us

#3 Posted by Mercy_ (92695 posts) - - Show Bio

O_O

Moderator
#4 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@The Dark Huntress said:

O_O

yup and to top off the good news its quite literally a media blackout on it

#5 Posted by Wise Son (1772 posts) - - Show Bio

-_-

#6 Posted by BiteMe-Fanboy (7828 posts) - - Show Bio

Tsh. Obama.

#7 Posted by nickthedevil (12400 posts) - - Show Bio

I used to live a happier more innocent, less fearful lifestyle before joining the comicvine O_0

#8 Posted by mikethekiller (8399 posts) - - Show Bio

This is seriously bad news

#9 Posted by Ebbm (1118 posts) - - Show Bio

And yet we call ourselves the land of the "free". what a joke

USA USA USA!!!!

#10 Posted by Ebbm (1118 posts) - - Show Bio

as long as it protects us from the scury turrists

#11 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@Ebbm said:

as long as it protects us from the scury turrists

you would give up your freedom for security?

#12 Posted by Ebbm (1118 posts) - - Show Bio

@FLCL1 said:

@Ebbm said:

as long as it protects us from the scury turrists

you would give up your freedom for security?

sarcasm

#13 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@mikethekiller said:

This is seriously bad news

technically speaking the government with this bill can bring on a new holocaust.

grabbing whoever you want, in any quantity, to put them in a secure place where anything can happen, and tell family and friend that they have no idea what happen to them?

#14 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@Ebbm said:

@FLCL1 said:

@Ebbm said:

as long as it protects us from the scury turrists

you would give up your freedom for security?

sarcasm

i caught it as soon as i posted lol

#15 Edited by CATPANEXE (9368 posts) - - Show Bio

Dear Ms. ******:

Thank you for contacting me regarding defense policy. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

In December, the Senate passed its version of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 (S.1867). This legislation authorizes funding levels and programs for the Department of Defense. Specifically, Sections 1031 to 1034 reauthorized detention, interrogation, and prosecution practices regarding enemy combatants. Individuals authorized for detainment under military custody are persons who have planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks on 9/11, or supported al Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces in hostilities against the United States. This detention authority remains in accordance with the laws of war.

I appreciate your concern regarding these provisions. However, this legislation maintains the status quo on detainee policy as the Obama Administration has abided by since 2009. During consideration of the bill, Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) introduced an amendment (SA 1456), which passed with my support by a vote of 99-1, confirming that nothing in the bill "shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of U.S. citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States." Additionally, the Executive Branch has been given the authority to issue a waiver for certain individuals and to establish the procedures for determining which individuals are subject to military custody or civilian custody.

In 2004, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld that U.S. citizens found to be belligerent, enemy combatants against the United States could be subject to military commissions for prosecution. S.1867 continues to uphold the current policies and procedures established under the Military Commission Act of 2009 and the Supreme Court's ruling in Hamdi. While the war on terrorism continues to threaten our nation, I will continue to support detainee policies focused on keeping our warfighters and citizens, both at home and abroad, safe.

Again thank you for taking the time to contact me. If you would like more information on issues before the Senate, please visit my website at http://roberts.senate.gov/. You may also sign up on my home page for a monthly electronic newsletter that will provide additional updates on my work for Kansas.

With every best wish,

A

Sincerely,

Pat Roberts

#16 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio
#17 Edited by _Zombie_ (10442 posts) - - Show Bio

Obama. You just lost my damn vote. As of now, I'd rather vote for Perry or Bachmann.

#18 Edited by JediXMan (30566 posts) - - Show Bio

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

Moderator Online
#19 Posted by Illuminatus (9509 posts) - - Show Bio

Sigh.

#20 Edited by _Zombie_ (10442 posts) - - Show Bio

@JediXMan said:

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

Pretty soon here, China's going to be a more attractive place to live.

#21 Posted by ssejllenrad (12847 posts) - - Show Bio

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@JediXMan said:

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

Pretty soon here, China's going to be a more attractive place to live.

State aside, China IS a more attractive place... Well it's a matter of opinion really. But I do appreciate China's natural and cultural sceneries more than that of US. Again, that's setting aside the state. And just my opinion.

#22 Posted by krilling (2488 posts) - - Show Bio

Why am I not surprised..

#23 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@JediXMan said:

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

Pretty soon here, China's going to be a more attractive place to live.

if i ever get the chance canada here i come

#24 Edited by _Zombie_ (10442 posts) - - Show Bio

@ssejllenrad said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@JediXMan said:

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

Pretty soon here, China's going to be a more attractive place to live.

State aside, China IS a more attractive place... Well it's a matter of opinion really. But I do appreciate China's natural and cultural sceneries more than that of US. Again, that's setting aside the state. And just my opinion.

I agree, but my point was kind of that if we keep going down the road we're on.. China's going to more 'free' than we are.

@FLCL1 said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@JediXMan said:

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

Pretty soon here, China's going to be a more attractive place to live.

if i ever get the chance canada here i come

If it weren't for the financial crisis in Europe, I'd try to go to Ireland myself.

#25 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (33336 posts) - - Show Bio

I have no idea what this means

#26 Edited by _Zombie_ (10442 posts) - - Show Bio

@spiderbat87 said:

I have no idea what this means

It basically means that if they want to, the government can imprison you indefinitely without trial, if they suspect you of 'terrorism'.

#27 Posted by Primmaster64 (21138 posts) - - Show Bio

Awh hell no.

#28 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

i expected more outrage/comments

as it stands obama lost my vote

#29 Posted by difficlus (10679 posts) - - Show Bio

@FLCL1: link doesn't work...

=[

#30 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (33336 posts) - - Show Bio
@ZombieBigfoot said:

@spiderbat87 said:

I have no idea what this means

It basically means that if they want to, the government can imprison you indefinitely without trial, if they suspect you of 'terrorism'.

I'd like to see them fly there arses out to Scotland to get me.
#31 Posted by Shanana (53023 posts) - - Show Bio
@FLCL1: This doesn't break your trust in politicians at all?
#32 Posted by SpidermanWins (3982 posts) - - Show Bio

And so the Bill of Rights is shredded and is hopefully recycled into a passport so I can leave the country soon.

#33 Edited by SpidermanWins (3982 posts) - - Show Bio

Oh yeah and now Anonymous is pissed and tomorrow they are probably going to replace every webpage they can with protest signs. They are calling it "Operation Blackout".

Not really sure what I think of that yet.

#34 Posted by RedheadedAtrocitus (6885 posts) - - Show Bio
#35 Posted by The Stegman (24322 posts) - - Show Bio
#36 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@difficlus said:

@FLCL1: link doesn't work...

=[

they probably got rid of it

its a media blackout on SOPA and NDAA to avoid mass panic

#37 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@Ziccarra_Liafador said:

@FLCL1: This doesn't break your trust in politicians at all?

i never trusted them

the government has become a corrupt joke and its up to us as americans to fix this by any means possible.

but the real question is, how can we come together if 70% of americans are blind to this?

#38 Edited by Kubashi (214 posts) - - Show Bio

GOD damn, I keep seeing this ignorance every where.
 
I read the bill itself on the section of detaining.
 
This does not extend to US Citizens and lawful resident aliens.
 
The AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force) was passed on Sept. 14, 2001 which already gave the president the power to use military force to detain anyone suspected of terrorism related to 9/11 and Al-Qaeda.
 
Obama himself addressed that this would not extend to US citizens, do you think he will say that and go with detaining people left and right just because they look funny?
 
Obama can't veto the bill because the bill is actually meant for funding the military. Doing so will only get it override in a cake walk

#39 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kubashi said:

GOD damn, I keep seeing this ignorance every where.

I read the bill itself on the section of detaining.

This does not extend to US Citizens and lawful resident aliens.

The AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force) was passed on Sept. 14, 2001 which already gave the president the power to use military force to detain anyone suspected of terrorism related to 9/11 and Al-Qaeda. Obama himself addressed that this would not extend to US citizens, do you think he will say that and go with detaining people left and right just because they look funny? Obama can't veto the bill because the bill is actually meant for funding the military. Doing so will only get it override in a cake walk

you are a idiot

the bill its self is made to "protect" the USA. the bill also gives the army nearly unlimited power inside the country.

if you are suspected to be a threat against the united states they can lock you up with out trial or charges, in fact many news reports covered this already. they are already trying to label the occupy movement a threat against america.

#40 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kubashi: as you were saying?

#41 Posted by I'maDC/ImageGuy! (1648 posts) - - Show Bio

They don't seem to be bad. Hell they have Randy Savage.

#42 Posted by Kubashi (214 posts) - - Show Bio

AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed
to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of
United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States,
or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United
States.
 
UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain
a person in military custody under this section does not extend
to citizens of the United States.
LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detain
a person in military custody under this section does not extend
to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis
of conduct taking place within the United States, except to
the extent permitted by the Constitution
 
From the text of the bill itself, you can't take two senator's word to believe that NDAA=MARTIAL LAW
 
President himself said it does not apply to US citizens. 
 
The AUMF already gave the military the power to detain people suspected in terrorism.
 
Don't trust what the media says, read the Bill itself and understand what it's saying.

#43 Posted by I'maDC/ImageGuy! (1648 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kubashi: Ah man. This means the NWO won't come back on TNA.

#44 Posted by Deadcool (6810 posts) - - Show Bio

The Captain America is somewhere crying, the country he represents is no longer what he used to believe...

NO, you move!
Internet = Freedom
#45 Posted by FLCL1 (9580 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kubashi said:

AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construedto affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention ofUnited States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States,or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the UnitedStates. UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detaina person in military custody under this section does not extendto citizens of the United States.LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detaina person in military custody under this section does not extendto a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basisof conduct taking place within the United States, except tothe extent permitted by the Constitution From the text of the bill itself, you can't take two senator's word to believe that NDAA=MARTIAL LAW President himself said it does not apply to US citizens. The AUMF already gave the military the power to detain people suspected in terrorism. Don't trust what the media says, read the Bill itself and understand what it's saying.

ever heard of loop holes?

All persons arrested and detained according to the provisions of section 1021, including those detained on U.S. soil, whether detained indefinitely or not, are required to be held by the united states armed forces. it says that it doesnt extend to america citizens however it gives them the power to take any suspected of terrorism. they already used this power to arrest citizens who they guess are involved in some terrorist plot. this bill is only giving section 1021 more power.

#46 Posted by Static Shock (47329 posts) - - Show Bio
@FLCL1 said:

you are a idiot

Name calling isn't necessary. Try to address him without insulting him next time. 
#47 Posted by _Zombie_ (10442 posts) - - Show Bio

@spiderbat87 said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@spiderbat87 said:

I have no idea what this means

It basically means that if they want to, the government can imprison you indefinitely without trial, if they suspect you of 'terrorism'.

I'd like to see them fly there arses out to Scotland to get me.

Ah, should of put 'U.S. citizens'. My bad. But I wouldn't put it past American politicians to try something like that..

#48 Posted by Donovan Montgomery (5435 posts) - - Show Bio

@Deadcool: You read Captain America's speech in this issue? If not I'll put it up tomorrow. As for this topic, I've heard about it and for now I think I'm safe being a Canadian ;)

If you have no ties or reason for them to believe you have ties to terrorists, not to much to worry about yet............

#49 Posted by Kubashi (214 posts) - - Show Bio
@FLCL1: "this bill is only giving section 1021 more power."
 
Nope, the bill also states that it neither increases or decreases the power the military already have prior to the AUMF passed on 2001.
 
"however it gives them the power to take any suspected of terrorism."
 
Yes suspected of terrorism as it is stated in the bill of what you have to be or do in order to be eligible for military detaining. Someone has to leave a very large indication of terrorism in order to be detained by the military. A normal American wouldn't come close to be suspected of the things listed out in the bill much less the part where US citizens are exempt from military detaining.
 
Besides historically the military or president can lock up people for suspected hostilities such as the Japanese Interment as long as the courts says it's okay and the AUMF is allowed by the courts.
 
What I'm getting at is that this does not equal martial law which is why I get pissed or annoyed seeing the ignorance.
 
Especially the title of this thread "NDAA is now martial law", when in reality the NDAA is a military defense budget bill that has been passed every year since 1964.
#50 Edited by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio