Wtf?!

[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?