FLCL1

This user has not updated recently.

9479 0 50 122
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

NDAA is now martial law

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?

61 Comments

62 Comments

Avatar image for kubashi
Kubashi

215

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kubashi
@PunkMastaFlex:  Okay maybe I need to shorten my message here.....
 
This bill on the part of military detaining merely restates powers already given to the military prior to the AUMF passed on 2001. 
 
This bill does not give any added powers nor does it decrease it, it's just there to be a part of the things the military are to do with the budget they're going to receive just like every year.
 
If martial is going to happen, it would've happened back in 2001 when it was most relevant and most dire, but it did not come and many people here probably didn't even know about the AUMF or even what the NDAA is actually about.
 
So it doesn't matter what you say and doesn't matter how much you argue against this, because this thing already exists a decade ago.
Avatar image for sexy_merc
sexy_merc

42516

Forum Posts

1129

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By sexy_merc
Avatar image for donovan_montgomery
Donovan Montgomery

5751

Forum Posts

2822

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 17

Here's that conversation between Captain America and Daredevil from 1990:

"Victor" has built a car that flies and runs on harmonics,

No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided

Think it has much relevance to this topic? I think it's pretty close.

Avatar image for jonny_anonymous
Jonny_Anonymous

45773

Forum Posts

11109

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 32

Edited By Jonny_Anonymous
@joshmightbe said:

@spiderbat87: This was taken from an actual speech from Cap to Spiderman

yea I know, It's a cool speech
Avatar image for daveyo520
Daveyo520

2469

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Daveyo520

lol, oh you internet people.

Avatar image for joshmightbe
joshmightbe

27563

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 13

Edited By joshmightbe

@spiderbat87: This was taken from an actual speech from Cap to Spiderman

Avatar image for jonny_anonymous
Jonny_Anonymous

45773

Forum Posts

11109

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 32

Edited By Jonny_Anonymous
@joshmightbe said:
No Caption Provided
Man I wish they gave Captain America or Union Jack a cool speech like this.
Avatar image for royaldivinity
RoyalDivinity

3384

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By RoyalDivinity

@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.

Doesn't matter what you say and doesn't matter how much you argue against this, empty words to argue against something with the addition of pure ignorance has always brought people to their deaths. History has proven it. Instead of standing your ground and arguing against something that you believed wasn't going to be passed, argue against it.

Avatar image for shanana
shanana

61722

Forum Posts

9001

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 4

Edited By shanana

You can make all the "protections" for the bill if you want to, however there are 5 amendments that this law goes against. Making any type of law that completely overrules the rights of the people is unconstitutional.  The Government knows exactly what it's doing, in 2007 they purposely didn't reinstate a law that says the U.S military couldn't fire on the American people; meaning if something big were to happen say a riot or something. They could shoot down there own people, provisions implemented when Truman was President originally said it was unlawful to do so. Now they have the power to do so, but "Wont?" I call BS. I don't see why the supreme courts haven't stepped in yet...oh wait yeah i do. but i'm leaving it at that.

Avatar image for donovan_montgomery
Donovan Montgomery

5751

Forum Posts

2822

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 17

@Deadcool: Tha's kinda why I put "not much to worry about."

Now I wanta try and make a thing like josh posted with that speech....

Avatar image for deadcool
Deadcool

6944

Forum Posts

1084

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 35

Edited By Deadcool

@Donovan Montgomery said:

You read Captain America's speech in this issue? If not I'll put it up tomorrow.

No I haven't O_O...

As for this topic, I've heard about it and for now I think I'm safe being a Canadian ;)

Well, actually I am safe too because I am not from USA, but it doesn't matter, is not fair to anyone, everybody has the right to have a trial, this reminds me the Civil War...

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

It is no fair, what if they do a mistake, an innocent would be in the jail, instead of this madness they should inprove the way they provide justice.

Avatar image for joshmightbe
joshmightbe

27563

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 13

Edited By joshmightbe
No Caption Provided
Avatar image for kubashi
Kubashi

215

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kubashi
@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.
Avatar image for donovan_montgomery
Donovan Montgomery

5751

Forum Posts

2822

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 17

@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............

Avatar image for _zombie_
_Zombie_

10572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By _Zombie_

@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..

Avatar image for static_shock
Static Shock

53198

Forum Posts

12480

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Static Shock
@FLCL1 said:

you are a idiot

Name calling isn't necessary. Try to address him without insulting him next time. 
Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@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.

Avatar image for deadcool
Deadcool

6944

Forum Posts

1084

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 35

Edited By Deadcool

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

NO, you move!
NO, you move!
Internet = Freedom
Internet = Freedom
Avatar image for i_madc_imageguy_
I'maDC/ImageGuy!

1636

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By I'maDC/ImageGuy!

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

Avatar image for kubashi
Kubashi

215

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kubashi

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.

Avatar image for i_madc_imageguy_
I'maDC/ImageGuy!

1636

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By I'maDC/ImageGuy!

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

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@Kubashi: as you were saying?

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@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.

Avatar image for kubashi
Kubashi

215

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kubashi

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

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@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?

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@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

Avatar image for the_stegman
the_stegman

41911

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By the_stegman  Moderator
Avatar image for redheadedatrocitus
RedheadedAtrocitus

6958

Forum Posts

8982

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 3

Avatar image for spidermanwins
SpidermanWins

4142

Forum Posts

2676

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 13

Edited By SpidermanWins

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.

Avatar image for spidermanwins
SpidermanWins

4142

Forum Posts

2676

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 13

Edited By SpidermanWins

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

Avatar image for shanana
shanana

61722

Forum Posts

9001

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 4

Edited By shanana
@FLCL1: This doesn't break your trust in politicians at all?
Avatar image for jonny_anonymous
Jonny_Anonymous

45773

Forum Posts

11109

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 32

Edited By Jonny_Anonymous
@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.
Avatar image for difficlus
difficlus

10659

Forum Posts

3482

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By difficlus

@FLCL1: link doesn't work...

=[

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

i expected more outrage/comments

as it stands obama lost my vote

Avatar image for primmaster64
Primmaster64

21668

Forum Posts

16273

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Primmaster64

Awh hell no.

Avatar image for _zombie_
_Zombie_

10572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By _Zombie_

@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'.

Avatar image for jonny_anonymous
Jonny_Anonymous

45773

Forum Posts

11109

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 32

Edited By Jonny_Anonymous

I have no idea what this means

Avatar image for _zombie_
_Zombie_

10572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By _Zombie_

@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.

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@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

Avatar image for krilling
krilling

2497

Forum Posts

12742

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Edited By krilling

Why am I not surprised..

Avatar image for ssejllenrad
ssejllenrad

13112

Forum Posts

145

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By ssejllenrad

@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.

Avatar image for _zombie_
_Zombie_

10572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By _Zombie_

@JediXMan said:

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

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

Avatar image for trueilluminatus
TrueIlluminatus

9579

Forum Posts

18169

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By TrueIlluminatus

Sigh.

Avatar image for jedixman
JediXMan

42943

Forum Posts

35961

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 16

Edited By JediXMan  Moderator

Goodbye freedom of speech. Hello police state.

Avatar image for _zombie_
_Zombie_

10572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By _Zombie_

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

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1
Avatar image for catpanexe
CATPANEXE

9505

Forum Posts

2901

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By CATPANEXE

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

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@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

Avatar image for flcl1
FLCL1

9479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By FLCL1

@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?

  • 62 results
  • 1
  • 2