America Now A 'Battlefield' - You a POW? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-02-2011, 08:15 AM   #1
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 288
Local Time: 10:14 AM
America Now A 'Battlefield' - You a POW?

THE GREAT THANKSGIVING CIVIL LIBERTIES RAID

Nice timing. While you were giving thanks, the Senate was
preparing to baste you. Gearing up to define you as a TURKEY!

A new bill will allow the US Gov to redefine at will who is an enemy
and thus authorize the US Military to detain - you - indefinitely!

Say hello to S.1867. Say goodbye to Liberty.

Quote:
[img=left]http://www.aclu.org/files/imagecache/blog_image/blog_images/ndaa.jpg[/img]Senators Demand the Military Lock Up of
American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They
Define as Being Right Outside Your Window


The Senate is voting on a bill that goes to the
very heart of who we are as Americans.

A bill that will direct American military resources
not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war
zone, but at American citizens and other civilians
far from any battlefield — even people in the
United States itself.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens


Senate Votes To Let Military
Detain Americans Indefinitely

Senate Votes To Let Military Detain Americans Indefinitely, White House Threatens Veto
Indefinite Detention is Not Just For Al-Qaeda. Who's covered?
Whomever the US Secretary of Defense decides is an enemy:

Quote:
(e) Requirement for Briefings of Congress.—The Secretary of Defense
shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority
described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and
individuals considered to be "covered persons"
for purposes of
subsection (b)(2).

Read the Military Detention Bill - Blog - OpenCongress
Quote:
Addressing Levin and McCain's Apologists

An ugly push is being made by those who would see our country pick and
choose who is affected by the detention provisions in S1867. They point to
this in particular:


From section 1032 which specifically addresses the impositions of 1031:

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-

(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.

(2) 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 of the
United States.


This is not a prohibition on citizen detention.

Though it is not a "requirement," it is also not prohibited.
It simply means that the detention of citizens and their
classification
is left to the Executive Branch
.

The Hand That Feeds You: Addressing Levin and McCain's Apologists
Quote:
Sen. Paul: “My question would be under the provisions would it be possible
that an American citizen then could be declared an enemy combatant and
sent to Guantanamo Bay and detained indefinitely.”

Sen. McCain: “I think that as long as that individual, no matter who they
are, if they pose a threat to the security of the United States of America,
should not be allowed to continue that threat.”


There has been some confusion on the Internet as to whether the National
Defense Authorization Act really applies to U.S. citizens. But Sen. McCain’s
answer should clarify that once and for all.


The confusion stems from Section 1032, which deals with the military
detention of the people the Armed Forces captures “in the course of
hostilities.” Part of Section 1032 states:

“The requirement to detain a person in military custody under
this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.”


Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel of the ACLU,
explains the problem.

The exclusion on Section 1032 only applies to 1032. It doesn’t apply to
1031
,” he says. “And that only makes it worse, because any judge is
going to say, ‘Of course, members of Congress meant for American
citizens to be detained because if they didn’t, they would have put in the
exception they put in one section later.’ ”

Anders also noted that Sen. Lindsey Graham, a backer of the bill, has
said multiple times on the Senate floor, including on Tuesday, that
American citizens should be put into military detention without a lawyer.

McCain says American Citizens Can Be Sent to Guantanamo | The Progressive

Quote:
Udall, ACLU attempted sleight of hand
with opposition to military bill

Udall, ACLU attempted sleight of hand with opposition to military bill | Greeley Gazette

S.1867 allows Military to Intern Americans without Charges
Forum Post: S.1867 allows Military to Intern Americans without Charges | OccupyWallSt.org

Stop Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Due Process

U.S. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) who voted against the bill in the House,
says the act would indeed “permit the federal government to indefinitely
detain American citizens on American soil, without charge or trial, at the
discretion of the President.”

He notes that the language “does not preclude U.S. citizens from being
detained indefinitely
, without charge or trial, it simply makes such
detention discretionary
,” therefore it is misleading and outrageous.

Stop Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Due Process | The Moral Liberal
__________________

__________________
neil c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 05:33 PM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neil c View Post
THE GREAT THANKSGIVING CIVIL LIBERTIES RAID

Nice timing. While you were giving thanks, the Senate was
preparing to baste you. Gearing up to define you as a TURKEY!

A new bill will allow the US Gov to redefine at will who is an enemy
and thus authorize the US Military to detain - you - indefinitely!

Say hello to S.1867. Say goodbye to Liberty.



Indefinite Detention is Not Just For Al-Qaeda. Who's covered?
Whomever the US Secretary of Defense decides is an enemy:

Stop Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Due Process | The Moral Liberal
Another reminder that nuance has a liberal bias.
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 05:35 PM   #3
War Child
 
Dfit00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 893
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Who remembers the song Love is a Battlefield?

America = Love.
__________________
Dfit00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 05:41 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 04:14 AM


__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 05:54 PM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 11:14 AM
Given the American military industrial complex hasn't actually won a war in 66 years, I suppose it was inevitable that they would eventually turn their attention to easier targets than the Vietcong, the Taliban and the Iraqi resistance - i.e. the American civilian populace!

Obama might as well be serving Bush's third term.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 06:26 PM   #6
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 11:14 AM
What actually happened with this was that Feinstein, Levin and Durbin submitted an eleventh-hour amendment to the text stating:
Quote:
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.
That amendment was approved 99 to 1, meaning that while the bill itself passed, the status quo on detainees remains unchanged--effectively, they punted the question to the Supreme Court. This does however mean that the House and Senate versions of the bill are now different and will have to be reconciled.

Obama had already threatened to veto the bill and without that threat hanging over it, things would likely have turned out even worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Another reminder that nuance has a liberal bias.
He's cutting and pasting text from a lunatic Irish "freelance journalist" who thinks Obama is part of a KGB plot to foment Marxist revolution in the US and that Lyndon LaRouche, Ralph Nader and Democracy Now! among others are CIA plants in league with this nefarious KGB axis. I am not making this up, Google it.

S.1867 itself is a legit issue; the source in this case is insane.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 08:29 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
S.1867 itself is a legit issue; the source in this case is insane.
I agree except the source is "The Moral Liberal."
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 08:35 PM   #8
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 11:14 AM
The source of what? I don't see the contents of that post on their site?
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 08:43 PM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Among the links in the post are:
OccupyWallSt.org
The Progressive
The Moral Liberal

I only plan on pointing out the condescending foolishness of the meme, "nuance has a liberal bias."
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 08:51 PM   #10
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 11:14 AM
The Moral Liberal describes itself as a site devoted to "Promoting the Judeo-Christian ethic, limited government, and That Heavenly Banner: The US Constitution," FWIW. Civil liberties activism crosses party lines. (Or am I misreading your point in inferring you meant otherwise?)

Anyhoo, I was referring to the fact that the entire OP content, from the thread title to the poster's text to the quote box contents, is lifted wholesale from the source I was describing.

As for "Nuance has a liberal bias," it's just another throwaway political slogan.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 12:56 AM   #11
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,655
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500

I agree except the source is "The Moral Liberal."
Do you not mind that you've become a caracture?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 09:22 PM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Winterfell
Posts: 3,825
Local Time: 06:14 AM
So now that the whole country is a battlefield, do the insurance companies get to invoke their act of war clause and deny claims?
__________________
Steved1998 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2011, 01:15 AM   #13
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,712
Local Time: 02:14 AM
Ha.
__________________

__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com