Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 129

Thread: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

  1. #91
    Revolutionary
    TNAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,018
    Blog Entries
    17

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I've seen little opposition to Obama ordering the death of an American citizen without due process. Sadly.
    I find the lengths some people go to in order to defend these actions truly appalling and rather frightening. It really makes you wonder how far people would let the government go...

  2. #92
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I've seen little opposition to Obama ordering the death of an American citizen without due process. Sadly.
    Did you oppose it?

    (I give you the benefit of the doubt - I know you're one of the few people who stick with his principles no matter what around here).
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  3. #93
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Did you oppose it?

    (I give you the benefit of the doubt - I know you're one of the few people who stick with his principles no matter what around here).
    Absolutely. ...

  4. #94
    King of Videos
    dirtpoorchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    WA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,023

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Invisible View Post
    Actually, that's not true at all. Here's the thing, this bill does not grant the President any new powers, rather, it solidifies and codifies old ones into law. Under the Patriot Act people were detained indefinitely (Imprisoned by the Patriot Act -- In These Times) (GrepLaw | Photographer Arrested "Under Patriot Act") and the 2006 Military Commissions Act gives the President the power to label protesters unlawful enemy combatants (JURIST - Hotline: Challenging the Military Commissions Act). The definition of unlawful enemy combatants is so vague to the point where it can include US citizens.
    Then take into consideration they are already targeting/targeted Americans for execution that have zero combat power in other countries. I bet they would go crazy nutts with laws like this.
    I'm Finding it Harder to be a Gentleman, White Stripes ~ "You think I care about me and only me. When every girl needs help climbing up a tree."

  5. #95
    A Man Without A Country
    Mr. Invisible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,961
    Blog Entries
    71

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtpoorchris View Post
    Then take into consideration they are already targeting/targeted Americans for execution that have zero combat power in other countries. I bet they would go crazy nutts with laws like this.
    Definitely. To finally close this argument about whether the bill allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens, Obama stated when he signed the bill that his "Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens." Thus, he does acknowledge that the bill allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens.
    "And in the end, we were all just humans, drunk on the idea that love, only love, could heal our brokenness."

  6. #96
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Invisible View Post
    Definitely. To finally close this argument about whether the bill allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens, Obama stated when he signed the bill that his "Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens." Thus, he does acknowledge that the bill allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens.
    But if he had not stated that, then the bill would not have allowed for the indefinite detention of US citizens, correct?

    But more importantly, using the same logic, the bill also allows for the the indefinite confiscation of chocolate ice cream. U.S. chocolate ice cream, on U.S. soil no less. Frankly I'm surprised at the lack of outrage, and have begun to wonder if that is evidence of vanilla bias in the media . . . . .

  7. #97
    Revolutionary
    TNAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,018
    Blog Entries
    17

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl
    But more importantly, using the same logic, the bill also allows ...
    Your logic is flawed.

    Claim: The NDAA allows for indefinite detention.
    Evidence 1: Sections 1021 and 1022 contained no exclusion of U.S. citizens (in early versions).
    Evidence 2: Obama specified that he would not allow U.S. citizens to be detained.

    Logic flow (positive): If the NDAA did allow for indefinite detention of U.S. citizens then Evidence #2 is the executive treatment to the contrary of the specified law (e.g. "my administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention...")

    Logic flow (negative): If the NDAA did not allow for indefinite detention of U.S. citizens then Evidence #2 is superfluous and unnecessary since he would be stating something which was already the case.

  8. #98
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by TNAR View Post
    Your logic is flawed.

    Claim: The NDAA allows for indefinite detention.
    Evidence 1: Sections 1021 and 1022 contained no exclusion of U.S. citizens (in early versions).
    Evidence 2: Obama specified that he would not allow U.S. citizens to be detained.

    Logic flow (positive): If the NDAA did allow for indefinite detention of U.S. citizens then Evidence #2 is the executive treatment to the contrary of the specified law (e.g. "my administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention...")

    Logic flow (negative): If the NDAA did not allow for indefinite detention of U.S. citizens then Evidence #2 is superfluous and unnecessary since he would be stating something which was already the case.
    My logic is pristine:

    Fact: The NDAA does not prohibit indefinite detention.
    Fact: The NDAA does not prohibit the indefinite confiscation of chocolate ice cream.

    Right Wing Conclusion: Therefore both are allowed.

    Your logic 'flow' affirms the negative in order to prove a positive. This is not the Comedy Forum

  9. #99
    Sage
    presluc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,924

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by katsung47 View Post
    How could those law makers propose to abandon our basic rights?
    Aren't these the same politicians that was screaming "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."?
    That was during the pre-invasion of Iraq.

    Now their saying "America is part of the battlefield"?

    Well , Hell they.ve declared war on everything else from abortion to drugs to poverty, to terrorist.
    I guess they run out of things to declare war on.
    Although I have to wander if this law has anything to do with the protestors that's been in the streets lately?
    Tiki bar regular.
    My code, never take anything for granted always expect the unexpexted.
    Never take anything you don't need ,never want anything you can't have

  10. #100
    Revolutionary
    TNAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,018
    Blog Entries
    17

    Re: Bill To Be Voted On Today Would Allow The Military To Sweep Up US Citizens At

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl
    Fact: The NDAA does not prohibit indefinite detention.
    Fact: The NDAA does not prohibit the indefinite confiscation of chocolate ice cream.
    Your logic is still flawed. Let me walk you through this step-by-step.

    As I pointed out in post #29, the early version of the bill allowed the indefinite detention of certain defined persons. (Notice they do not all the indefinite confiscation of chocolate ice cream cone, thus blowing your ridiculous attempt at trivializing this debate out of the water.)

    Quote Originally Posted by NDAA (Early version)
    SEC. 1034.
    (3) the current armed conflict includes nations, organization, and persons who--
    (A) are part of, or are substantially supporting, al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners; or
    (B) have engaged in hostilities or have directly supported hostilities in aid of a nation, organization, or person described in subparagraph (A); and
    (4) the President's authority pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority to detain belligerents, including persons described in paragraph (3), until the termination of hostilities.
    Notice that it 1) does not say that U.S. citizens are not included in the description and 2) the term of detention is until the termination of hostilities, which in realistic terms means indefinite.

    Then, as I pointed out in post #74, there was a lot of publicity about this and they changed the text of the bill. The final text as implemented into Public Law 112-81 includes a new subpart as follows:

    Quote Originally Posted by NDAA Section 1022(b)(1)
    UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •