Wtf?!

[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.

[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.

[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?