Wtf?!

[Steamer]

http://nvonews.com/2011/12/06/the-national-defense-authorization-act%E2%80%99s-new-provision-faces-attack-from-all/

The National Defense Authorization Act has a new provision, this will give armed forces overriding freedom to detain anyone on charges of terrorism and keep him in detention indefinitely without taking him or her to a civil court. Really... Am I the only one pissed about this? We all know it happens already, but on this kind of level and scale? WTF.

[acolyte_to_jippity]

i'm reading the bill, and there's no new provision...

at all.


you do realize wired was the place that all this 'killing americans' bullshit started, right? they're trolling the fuck out of everyone retarded enough to not read the bill itself.

and, the most recent provision/ammendment actually LIMITS the military's power to do so...

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

i was going to post about this when i got home from work but i see you beat me to it.

Here is the issue with that article... they author makes it out to sound like every soilder will just be givin free reign to start arresting who ever the fuck they want when in reality there are rules and regulations every soldier lives by. That article is actually more anti american then i can even stomach because its trying to scare the public into not trusting there soldiers whom they have so gratefully supported threw thick an thin. In the event that this bill is passed im sure and more then positive that there will be restrictions as to who in the military does the arresting and what specific boundary's there would be regarding a possible arrest. In any case the people who would inevitably be arrested by the military would be taken in on either proven or suspicion to terrorist activity or sympathizing. to clearify, they would be arrested as an enemy of the united states of america, regardless if they are a citizen or not. They would not have the right to a civil trial because they arnt being arrested as a civilian, they are being arrested as a enemy in war, Law of war covers the treatment of these detained individuals. Read up on the law of war and you might think differently about this smart precautionary measure to protect our boarders from possible attack.


If your lazy and dont want to read about the LoW then here is a scenario. You are just finishing up in a fire fight and notice your best Battle wounded, shot in the calf. Right net to him is a terrorist who has been shot in the chest. LoW states that you must treat the most injured soldier first, regardless of which side there on. so at the end of the day, though the possible detained might not get a "fair trial" there treated just as fair if not better as a Prisoner of war.

[Steamer]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:2:./temp/~c112QSB3AK:e548990:

"(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."

Phew... good. Still have a right to trial as a citizen instead of being straight locked away. Provision acceptable.

Side note, I can read. The provision for citizens was not there when I last looked at the act.

[acolyte_to_jippity]

like i said, the last ammendment they added limited the powers of detainment for the military.

ffs, people are just being retards about this.

[Steamer]

ffs, people are just being retards about this.

They probably haven't seen the edited provision yet.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

at the end of the day, what is there to even fucking worry about if your an honest hard working citizen?

[Fluffy Frufflebottoms]

at the end of the day, what is there to even fucking worry about if your an honest hard working citizen?

There's the fear of ending up like the honest, hard working citizens who were detained without charge, or flown to countries where regard for human rights is low, and tortured. Fear based on precedent seems fairly rational.

It's nice to know, though, that I live in a country where I can be detained indefinitely without the protections that supposedly make it great.

[KɅΞW]

Aww shit, a resident (green card holder) like me is fucked then. Welp, better start that application for citizenship.

[Chikun]

Yep, let's give government more power, sounds good to me.

[taz1stP]

remember if u get caught with 99 hits of acid they cant do shit but if its 100 u will be put in jail for conspiracy to over throw the gov by genocide. just a little bit of info there so u best make sure u count well. XD

[ZERO]

Yep, let's give government more power, sounds good to me.
We all know how well that works :banghead:

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

Yep, let's give government more power, sounds good to me.

That really isnt the case here though. People read that article and blow it way out of proportion. To fear what that article has to say simply means you fear the military and at the end of the day all the military will be doing is there jobs. its not giving more power to the government, its the government giving the military the right to apprehend possible and current threats to our national security and homeland.


There's the fear of ending up like the honest, hard working citizens who were detained without charge, or flown to countries where regard for human rights is low, and tortured. Fear based on precedent seems fairly rational.

It's nice to know, though, that I live in a country where I can be detained indefinitely without the protections that supposedly make it great.

then you haven't read up on the act, LoW and all of the other tacked provisions. If you are an honest working law abiding citizen, why would your life be any different? Just continue to live the way you have been for years. its not like soldiers would be out at every street corner setting up checkpoints to inspect your vehicle before entering citys. Besides, if you have been deemed a threat to the united states of America you would be "Processed" as one, just as someone being taken in as a PoW overseas. You are a PoW after being detained, you should be treated like one under the LoW and civil court is not part of that process.

[Fluffy Frufflebottoms]

then you haven't read up on the act, LoW and all of the other tacked provisions.

Feel free to elaborate.


If you are an honest working law abiding citizen, why would your life be any different? Just continue to live the way you have been for years. its not like soldiers would be out at every street corner setting up checkpoints to inspect your vehicle before entering citys. Besides, if you have been deemed a threat to the united states of America you would be "Processed" as one, just as someone being taken in as a PoW overseas. You are a PoW after being detained, you should be treated like one under the LoW and civil court is not part of that process.

"Deemed a threat" outside of the traditional judicial system, with no protections afforded. This kind of legislation keeps the country in a permanent, self-perpetuated state of war against an ideology, and the people that it accuses of following it. Keep in mind that being exempt from required detainment merely makes the detainment discretionary in accordance with the rest of the bill, and as far as I recall, the executive branch has come out and said that U.S. citizens and residents are fair game if they're deemed to be engaged in terrorism.

Declaring war on everyone who looks at you the wrong way, and giving military and intelligence agencies unilateral discretion to make that determination is the modus operandi of a police state, not of a free society. No nation with a legitimate respect for civil rights and justice would ever need this kind of legislation.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

Feel free to elaborate.



"Deemed a threat" outside of the traditional judicial system, with no protections afforded. This kind of legislation keeps the country in a permanent, self-perpetuated state of war against an ideology, and the people that it accuses of following it. Keep in mind that being exempt from required detainment merely makes the detainment discretionary in accordance with the rest of the bill, and as far as I recall, the executive branch has come out and said that U.S. citizens and residents are fair game if they're deemed to be engaged in terrorism.

Declaring war on everyone who looks at you the wrong way, and giving military and intelligence agencies unilateral discretion to make that determination is the modus operandi of a police state, not of a free society. No nation with a legitimate respect for civil rights and justice would ever need this kind of legislation.

Dont get your head stuck around our country's way of handling criminals. As i stated once before the Law Of War and Geneva convention give strict and very clear rules when handling someone of that status. if some one commits a crime in the states it is handled by the judicial system, if someone commits an act of war or terrorism, they are handled under the Law of war. Its not hard to understand, really. It almost sounds as if your defending citizens who ARE currently involved in some terrorist activity by showing no trust in the people who live an die for your freedom. To fear a bill like this only means you do not have a clear understanding of how 1. the military works, 2. What the Law of war is, and 3. you feel like a possible target for god knows why.

Might i add that there would be serious repercussions if some random solider started arresting every body.

here is a link to a wiki page on the LOW
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war
i can assure you that detained individuals still have rights as a prisoner of war.

in case you are wondering why i am defending this bill, im sure you are aware that we are growing into some pretty tough times as an individual nation and globally. Being on loose terms now with some country's who have had a large amount of its people immigrate to America. If we were to go to war with one of those country's, who is to say someone now naturalized here in the states would want whats best for there home land then our country. The bill is a precaution to what may come down the road and i see it as a necessity in these times.

[Carmichal]

I'm starting a revolution who's in?

unless I get arrested for saying that...

[Fluffy Frufflebottoms]

Dont get your head stuck around our country's way of handling criminals. As i stated once before the Law Of War and Geneva convention give strict and very clear rules when handling someone of that status. if some one commits a crime in the states it is handled by the judicial system, if someone commits an act of war or terrorism, they are handled under the Law of war.

And we're right back to the issue of legislating a perpetual war against a concept. "Terrorism" according to the federal government doesn't just mean people shooting at soldiers half-way around the world, it means people suspected of perhaps participating peripherally in the support of those people right here in this country, and the federal government has a history of detaining indefinitely and without charge people who have been proven entirely innocent of what they were suspected of. That isn't war. That's domestic terrorism prosecuted under the guise of war to sidestep the rights enacted to protect the population.



Its not hard to understand, really. It almost sounds as if your defending citizens who ARE currently involved in some terrorist activity by showing no trust in the people who live an die for your freedom. To fear a bill like this only means you do not have a clear understanding of how 1. the military works, 2. What the Law of war is, and 3. you feel like a possible target for god knows why.

On the contrary, Mikey. You're fundamentally misunderstanding what the United States is when you advocate broad legislation based on faith in the empowered branches and agencies to conduct themselves appropriately. The legislative foundation of this country is to limit granted powers to the greatest extent possible, provide independent oversight wherever possible, and to do so only within the confines of the constitution. For a very good reason.

[Chikun]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16093106

This looks like a nice place to forever disappear with no hope.


in case you are wondering why i am defending this bill, im sure you are aware that we are growing into some pretty tough times as an individual nation and globally. Being on loose terms now with some country's who have had a large amount of its people immigrate to America. If we were to go to war with one of those country's, who is to say someone now naturalized here in the states would want whats best for there home land then our country. The bill is a precaution to what may come down the road and i see it as a necessity in these times.

You mean have something similar to what happened to Japanese-Americans during WWII? I don't like the shitty parts of history repeating them self. How about we just destroy our country before the boogie man does.

You've successfully made me a little upset.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16093106

This looks like a nice place to forever disappear with no hope.



You mean have something similar to what happened to Japanese-Americans during WWII? I don't like the shitty parts of history repeating them self. How about we just destroy our country before the boogie man does.

You've successfully made me a little upset.

you and every other scared shitless person dont understand, you act as if the military is run by the government, when our chain of command touches no one in any of the three branches save for our commander and cheif, Barak Obama. To make assumptions that taking precautionary measures like this great idea is going to end up just like what happened to the Japanese, is completely absurd and obnoxious. the only possible way this could happen is if lobbyist convinced and persuaded military leaders "soldiers" an or the president to do something. so what you are inevitably saying is that you have no faith in our military or our president when it comes to making decisions. If that is the case then why dso you bother living here in the states? As an honest citizen, this bill protects your rights indefinitely by adding extra protection against homeland attack. Now dont get me wrong, im not saying that if it were passed there wouldn't be any "HEADLINE NEWS" about chain of commands arresting innocent people but with how powerful the media is and the current "Uprising for economic equality" going on, any over the top accusations against a person would be looked at, and the person punished. Punished just like any other soldier who breaks the rules of Law of War. in the large scheme of things its beneficial, it still has some flaws and minor loop holes but its a great idea non the less. stop acting as if your life would change drastically because of this law passing.

[acolyte_to_jippity]

you and every other scared shitless person dont understand, you act as if the military is run by the government, when our chain of command touches no one in any of the three branches save for our commander and cheif, Barak Obama. To make assumptions that taking precautionary measures like this great idea is going to end up just like what happened to the Japanese, is completely absurd and obnoxious. the only possible way this could happen is if lobbyist convinced and persuaded military leaders "soldiers" an or the president to do something. so what you are inevitably saying is that you have no faith in our military or our president when it comes to making decisions. If that is the case then why dso you bother living here in the states? As an honest citizen, this bill protects your rights indefinitely by adding extra protection against homeland attack. Now dont get me wrong, im not saying that if it were passed there wouldn't be any "HEADLINE NEWS" about chain of commands arresting innocent people but with how powerful the media is and the current "Uprising for economic equality" going on, any over the top accusations against a person would be looked at, and the person punished. Punished just like any other soldier who breaks the rules of Law of War. in the large scheme of things its beneficial, it still has some flaws and minor loop holes but its a great idea non the less. stop acting as if your life would change drastically because of this law passing.

damn. well said mate.

[Penis シ]

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

That is all.

[Fluffy Frufflebottoms]

you and every other scared shitless person dont understand, you act as if the military is run by the government, when our chain of command touches no one in any of the three branches save for our commander and cheif, Barak Obama.

As well as the legislative branch from which the president requires authorization for certain military action, and the judicial branch which enforces the legislation.


To make assumptions that taking precautionary measures like this great idea is going to end up just like what happened to the Japanese, is completely absurd and obnoxious. the only possible way this could happen is if lobbyist convinced and persuaded military leaders "soldiers" an or the president to do something.

Lobbyists? You mean to say that nebulous lobbyists sent citizens with Japanese ancestry to concentration camps? That lobbyists performed extraordinary renditions? What's absurd and obnoxious is denying history and trusting with blind faith a single institution in determining reasonably the scope of enforcement of the duties that keep it relevant.


so what you are inevitably saying is that you have no faith in our military or our president when it comes to making decisions.

Precisely. Just as there's no faith in Congress to legislate without oversight, and no faith in the Supreme Court to unilaterally act judiciously. "Checks and balances," as it's commonly phrased. It's the cornerstone of the entire government.


If that is the case then why dso you bother living here in the states? As an honest citizen, this bill protects your rights indefinitely by adding extra protection against homeland attack.

No. It curtails rights to protect against a concept that not only won't ever go away, but is actively being cultivated.


stop acting as if your life would change drastically because of this law passing.

I don't think you'll find many sane and informed people who see merit in not learning from history. It certainly changed a lot of lives last time.

The only thing that stands between you and totalitarianism is a vigilant populace. You should be thankful that people speak up.

[Penis シ]

Fluffy and Mikey, I see your difference but I think you're fighting the wrong war.




The human condition is to live and procreate. The State's condition is to preserve history. America, Rome, Mongolia, China, the Ottomans, etc. all have/had the same goals in mind. They fight to preserve the history of their civilizations. They fight other histories, they fight other countries that endanger their history. To go against the grain of what our country fought to instate in it's very beginning is to go against our history AND country at that point as a whole.

I'm not against it because the Patriot Act has made to law that any person can be suspected of terrorism. I'm not against it because of the terrible overstep of habeas corpus.I'm not even against it because of what our country did after the attacks on Pearl Harbor and during WWII. I'm against it because though our country made it founding law to house our troops during times of crisis, our founding fathers, our very history itself made it a point to deny unreasonable offense to any and all citizens. See amendments 7, 9, and 10. At MOST I can see the Coast Guard of any individual state stepping in to make arrests of suspected terrorists. Outside of that, they are still to be guaranteed a speedy, public, and just trial and that is inalienably guaranteed via amendments 7&9.

I have no problem with the military stepping in to protect our home front if war is brought to it, but to invoke martial law in order to halt the actions of few if it oversteps the bounds of all is a step too far. Our military is meant to protect from all enemies foreign and domestic. I respect that oath, but when our leaders become a domestic enemy of the constitution, the most worthy thing the military can do is remove them from office as promised in their oath.

[Rosie]

Just to throw a little wrench in your plans. If the millitary wanted to take you prisoner before this they would just make you disappear. Atleast now they may acknowledge that you exist. in times of war you would be a POW, in peace time you are a PUCC (Person under constant control). I understand that this may cause uproar, but in all honesty it is just a elaboration of the freedom that the Patriot act had already given to National Deffense. I have been in charge of both POW's and PUCC's and I have never seen a hardworking, honest American pass infront of my barrel.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

Just to throw a little wrench in your plans. If the millitary wanted to take you prisoner before this they would just make you disappear. Atleast now they may acknowledge that you exist. in times of war you would be a POW, in peace time you are a PUCC (Person under constant control). I understand that this may cause uproar, but in all honesty it is just a elaboration of the freedom that the Patriot act had already given to National Deffense. I have been in charge of both POW's and PUCC's and I have never seen a hardworking, honest American pass infront of my barrel.

At least you are getting it. They still think Prisoners of war have a right to a civil court trial... if that were the case we should just bring all the terrorist we have captured over seas and bring them to judge judy!

[Penis シ]

Well, in times of war, POWs are subject to international crime law. The Bill of Rights only pertains to our citizens and with that, any criminals and suspected terrorists that are citizens are protected under the laws you are sworn to uphold.

[acolyte_to_jippity]

At least you are getting it. They still think Prisoners of war have a right to a civil court trial... if that were the case we should just bring all the terrorist we have captured over seas and bring them to judge judy!

fuck that, give judge judy a SCAR, an m1911, and maybe...like 4 grenades (plus a handful of mags for each weapon) and fly her over to the middle east. we'd be done in about a week.

[ZERO]

As well as the legislative branch from which the president requires authorization for certain military action, and the judicial branch which enforces the legislation.

Has any of the current military action been authorized by congress?

[acolyte_to_jippity]

Has any of the current military action been authorized by congress?

actually, yes, since it's been longer than like 90 days. the president holds absolute authority to make military actions but they must end after a certain time frame (as i said, 90 days or so) unless congress authorizes it.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

actually, yes, since it's been longer than like 90 days. the president holds absolute authority to make military actions but they must end after a certain time frame (as i said, 90 days or so) unless congress authorizes it.

an example?

[acolyte_to_jippity]

an example?

what do you mean?

[Steamer]

an example?

A broad one? Iraq.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

what do you mean?
an example of where the congress has any control over the military.

[Fluffy Frufflebottoms]

an example of where the congress has any control over the military.

Read the text of the War Powers Resolution.

[StarsMine]

As said, any military action longer the 90 days, congress has to approve... Meaning most of the places we occupy.