Please be mindful that there are many different views on the forums. The only thing we all agree on is the AR-10 is an awesome rifle!

Obama will NOT Veto ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill...

More
13 years 6 days ago #9513 by Hot Lead Zapper
Obama will NOT Veto ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill... was created by Hot Lead Zapper


Indefinite Military Detention Measure Passes On Bill Of Rights Day

WASHINGTON -- The Senate passed a defense bill Thursday that authorizes indefinite detentions of American terrorism suspects, coincidentally acting on the controversial measure on the 220th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights.
The bill, the National Defense Authorization Act, passed 86 to 13 and is expected to be signed quickly by President Obama, who withdrew a veto threat against the bill Wednesday. Six Democrats, six Republicans and one independent opposed the bill.
Though the legislation passed overwhelmingly, several senators argued that it was threatening fundamental provisions of the Bill of Rights, which is celebrated every Dec. 15.
"We as Americans have a right to a speedy trial, not indefinite detention," said Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.). "We as Americans have a right to a jury of our peers, which I would argue is ... not enlisted or military personnel sitting in a jury. You cannot search our businesses or place of business or our homes without probable cause under the Bill of Rights."
"You cannot be deprived of your freedom or your property without due process of law, and that, I would say, is not indefinite detention," added Kirk, who voted for the bill. "I would actually argue that no statute and no Senate and no House can take these rights away from you."
The 13 senators who voted against the bill were Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).
Supporters of the bill argued that current U.S. law is a combination of rulings and precedents that already allow indefinite detention of Americans. But they say that granting the military explicit authority to investigate and detain terrorism suspects -- including Americans -- is vital to ensuring the nation can keep up with an adaptable and changing enemy threat.

hey point to court rulings that have found detentions of citizens to be proper. But opponents say the issue of grabbing up Americans on U.S. soil and putting them in military detention without trial has never actually been tested by the Supreme Court.
"This provision would for the first time in American history require our military to take custody of certain terrorism suspects in the United States," said Durbin, who was especially concerned with two sections of the bill -- 1021 and 1022 -- and voted "no."
He argued -- citing FBI Director Robert Mueller's opposition to the provisions -- that there was no reason to mess with a system that has worked well since Sept. 11, 2001.

"Since 9/11 our counterterrorism professionals have prevented another attack on the United States, and more than 400 terrorists have successfully been prosecuted and convicted -- prosecuted and convicted -- in federal court," Durbin said. "Why do we want to change this system when it's working so well to keep America safe? The fact that these detainee provisions have caused so many disagreements and such heated debate demonstrates the danger of enacting them into law."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who added an amendment to the bill that specifies the resulting measure would not affect current law regarding citizens, argued that her provision provides protection for Americans.
Nevertheless, in voting for the bill, she also proposed a new bill that she, Durbin, Kirk and others intend to pursue later in hopes of making her interpretation the law.
"I strongly believe that constitutional due process requires that United States citizens apprehended in the United States should never be held in indefinite detention," Feinstein said. "That is what this legislation would accomplish."
Feinstein offered a similar amendment during earlier debate over the $662 billion defense bill, and it failed. It was not clear that this measure would do any better, although she noted that it built on a law signed in 1971 by President Nixon meant to curb abuses such as the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II.
The bill requires military treatment for foreign terrorism suspects. Defenders of the bill have pointed to one part of the provisions that say U.S. citizens are "exempted" from the requirement to be detained by the military, but legal scholars note that even though that detention is not required, it is allowed.
President Obama had threatened to veto the measure. But after provisions were added that gave him the final say over which suspects stay in military custody, he relented. Those provisions also ensured that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies would still be permitted to investigate and interrogate terrorist suspects. Mueller has called the provisions insufficient, warning that they will create bureaucratic roadblocks in the midst of vital investigations.
Obama could sign sign the bill as soon as Friday.
Civil liberties groups were infuriated that Obama retreated from the veto threat, and called on him to reconsider.
"The NDAA enshrines the war paradigm that has eroded the United States' human rights record and served it so poorly over the past decade as the country's primary counterterrorism tool," said Tom Parker, policy director of Amnesty International USA. "In doing so, the NDAA provides a framework for 'normalizing' indefinite detention and making Guantanamo a permanent feature of American life," he said, referring to a restriction in the measure on closing the Cuba prison for terror suspects.
"By withdrawing his threat to veto the NDAA, President Obama has abandoned yet another principled position with little or nothing to show for it," Parker said. "Amnesty International is appalled -- but regrettably not surprised."

www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/15/indefi...html?ref=mostpopular

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 years 5 days ago #9522 by Akai
Replied by Akai on topic Re: Obama will NOT Veto ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill...
Thanks for the info B) but all I here is Blah blah blah :blush:(from the political positions) I think we all understand where Obama stands on the issues of gun ownership and where things are headed(once again thanks for posting the info), could be worse then the 80's and Brady campgain :angry: :angry: join the NRA and support the people who can make a differance :cheer: Get your wepons while you can :evil:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 years 3 days ago #9536 by Hot Lead Zapper
Replied by Hot Lead Zapper on topic Re: Obama will NOT Veto ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill...

Akai wrote: Thanks for the info B) but all I here is Blah blah blah :blush:(from the political positions) I think we all understand where Obama stands on the issues of gun ownership and where things are headed(once again thanks for posting the info), could be worse then the 80's and Brady campgain :angry: :angry: join the NRA and support the people who can make a differance :cheer: Get your wepons while you can :evil:


Truth be known, Alan Gura’s representing the Heller and McDonald Federal Supreme Court Cases had done more for American Gun Owners in comparison to over 100 years of NRA’s plea-bargaining our 2nd Amendment Rights results. I’m a NRA lifetime member as well as a member of several other pro-gun and Pro-Constitutional groups.

The Constitution of the United States and our Bill of Rights was shredded beyond the 2nd Amendment powers and the NRA is sitting on the sidelines again.

The Patriot Act and National Defense Authorization Act do not establish or constitute written standards, which allows any government agency to change policies incorporating government and military dominance authority in regards to warrantless search, warrantless ease dropping, and warrantless arrest.

For example: The terms "Possible Terrorist" has already been added to the Dept. Homeland Security policies of "Terrorism Suspects" by methods of Janet Napolitano’s memos through out all government agencies.

1st) DHS has developed a "possible terrorist list” with the names of returning troops resigning from military service based on their military training.

2nd) DHS also is compiling data for "possible terrorist list” using debit or credit card receipts of “Preppers” storing food, camping gear, and medical supplies preparing for natural disasters because of lessons learned from Katrina.

3rd) Additional efforts by DoJ and ATF for DHS to retain multi-gun purchase data based on falsified results from the government's illegal operated Fast and Furious Program.

4th) Never minded, I'll stop because is all just Blah blah blah. Go back to sleep...the NRA will fix our lost of Constitutional Rights...!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 years 3 days ago #9538 by 12stones
Replied by 12stones on topic Re: Obama will NOT Veto ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill...
Your right on target Hot Lead. We all need to wake up and support the organizations and politicians that are willing to stand up for our rights and defend the constitution. This is still the greatest nation on the planet, and the only way we will stay great and free is to defend our constitution, as it was written by the founding fathers. we cant let weak politicians sign our rights away to the united nations using the excuse of homeland security. When patriots and "preppers" are considered possible terrorist we need to sound the alarm and wake up as many as possible.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 years 3 days ago - 13 years 3 days ago #9539 by Hot Lead Zapper
Replied by Hot Lead Zapper on topic Re: Obama will NOT Veto ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill...


"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Last edit: 13 years 3 days ago by Hot Lead Zapper.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 years 1 day ago #9543 by Akai
Replied by Akai on topic Re: Obama will NOT Veto ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill...
Yes, I agree, Been in detention since 6th grade and on list 1,2&4 maybe 3 B) As Linciln once said! oh not going there, last time had to agree to diagree :sick: So what should we do and who do we support? who or what is realy going to change things! Tell us now! Once again Blah, Blah, BLAH form most of our Politacitans maybe you misundersood my position :evil:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.