Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial!- Martial Law!

[twotif]

http://destructionist.wordpress.com/tag/national-defense-authorization-act/


Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Saturday, November 26, 2011

The Senate is set to vote on a bill next week that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

“The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.

Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor Monday, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.

The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing. The language appears in sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA bill.

“I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech last week. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.”

This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.

“American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?” asks Anders.

The ACLU is urging citizens to call their Senator and demand that the Udall Amendment be added to the bill, a change that would at least act as a check to prevent Americans being snatched off the streets without some form of Congressional oversight.

We have been warning for over a decade that Americans would become the target of laws supposedly aimed at terrorists and enemy combatants. Alex Jones personally documented how U.S. troops were being trained to arrest U.S. citizens in the event of martial law during urban warfare training drills back in the 90′s. Under the the National Defense Authorization Act bill, no declaration of martial law is necessary since Americans would now be subject to the same treatment as suspected insurgents in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.

If you thought that the executive assassination of American citizens abroad was bad enough, now similar powers will be extended to the “homeland,” in other words, your town, your community, your back yard.


I was in the hospital a few months ago and my roommate was a big conspiracy theorist. He was telling me how our government was in the process of setting up concentration camps for American citizens. I all but laughed in his face............Who's laughing now!?!

Welcome to Nazi Germany my friends.

I weep for my granddaughter's future.

[ThaBigP]

Many governments are in complete understanding what is at hand (within the next dozen months if not dozen weeks):

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8917077/Prepare-for-riots-in-euro-collapse-Foreign-Office-warns.html

Unfortunately, some are working to consolidate power into a "brave new world". Many are steadfast agsint it:

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

For those that are predisposed to manufacture law on-the-fly... well....

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14TacticalRifle/specSheets/5846.html

I would certainly weep if it comes to that .... but it will not be me who forces that hand.

[iceberg]

http://destructionist.wordpress.com/tag/national-defense-authorization-act/

I was in the hospital a few months ago and my roommate was a big conspiracy theorist. He was telling me how our government was in the process of setting up concentration camps for American citizens. I all but laughed in his face............Who's laughing now!?!

Welcome to Nazi Germany my friends.

I weep for my granddaughter's future.

many have been talking about this for awhile now. we've mortgaged our future to give away "entitlements" and now that people have to work for a living, making less than their parents or even what they used to, they get mad at the system that lied to them, even though they're still counting on the system to provide for them.

how many people in the "occupy" movement would have made it across the great west and would have been willing to work hard for next to nothing?

that's where we came from. now we're mad and sit in public parks in protest while on facebook telling the world how bad we have it.

[ThaBigP]

many have been talking about this for awhile now. we've mortgaged our future to give away "entitlements" and now that people have to work for a living, making less than their parents or even what they used to, they get mad at the system that lied to them, even though they're still counting on the system to provide for them.

how many people in the "occupy" movement would have made it across the great west and would have been willing to work hard for next to nothing?

that's where we came from. now we're mad and sit in public parks in protest while on facebook telling the world how bad we have it.

That's my biggest fear. Not that we're going into perhaps the Greatest Depression... it's that THIS generation of "GIMMIE! GIMMIE! GIMMIE! I'M ENTITLED!" malcontents is headed there alongside the rest of us, and they are legion. It's the panicked masses who laughed at you for suggesting this ship looks like it's going down now thrashing about in the water, swarming your life boat and threatening to flip it and toss everybody into the sea. And then we have our government ... dear, benevolent government ... ready to "help" ... with "solutions". Can't let a crisis go to waste, now can we?

[JBond]

http://destructionist.wordpress.com/tag/national-defense-authorization-act/

Welcome to Nazi Germany my friends.

I weep for my granddaughter's future.

The silly leftists in the Senate always want a more powerful central government. They are the problem, not the solution. I am surprised such an educated person as yourself was uninformed about this. It has been in the works for a while. Pay attention to Obama's minions. When the idiots that Obama has surrounded himself with spout their crap, pay attention. Obama is too chicken shit to express his true desires in public. The fact that a couple of republicans back this idea tells me there is still more house cleaning needed. Graham and McCain might as well have a great big "D" next to their names. They both love the leftists agenda. They support the global warming fraud. They support people breaking the law and entering our country illegally. They support making illegal aliens that commit felonies citizens. Basically they are no different than the run of the mill scumbag democrat that claims they are for the little guy.

[ThaBigP]

text of the irksome provision:



SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).

(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(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).

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined--

(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and

(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(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.

(c) Implementation Procedures-

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.

(2) ELEMENTS- The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:

(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.

(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.

(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a)(2) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation session which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing session.

(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.

(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a)(4) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.

(d) Effective Date- This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.


And notice how clever they are. They get very, VERY technical as to whom they may and may not round up under this section of the bill:


(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined--

(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and

(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.


"Except as provided in paragraph (4)"? Why, what's in paragraph (4) I wonder...? Why, it's a provision nullifying the entire laundry list of proscriptions on who may or may not be detained! They can make it up as they go, so long as they send a letter to Congress telling them they are waiving the exceptions in P1 (and by extension P2). They don't need Congress' approval, mind you - they just have to send them a letter.


(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.


They do go on to say this about the requirement of the military to detain in miltary custody whomever they pick up/round up:


(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.


What this provison states is that the military is not required to indefinitely detain US citizens and lawful residents. It does NOT proscribe the military from doing same - merely states that the *requirement* to do so does not extend to US citizens and lawful residents. Most likely this would result in a transfer of custody during detention. Such as to an internment camp of some sort under federal supervision (assuming they ever implemented this on a large scale).

Link to these detainee sections:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112QHMwMB:e462417:

PDF of the entire bill:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s1867pcs.pdf

[erdawiro]

The silly leftists in the Senate always want a more powerful central government. They are the problem, not the solution. I am surprised such an educated person as yourself was uninformed about this. It has been in the works for a while. Pay attention to Obama's minions. When the idiots that Obama has surrounded himself with spout their crap, pay attention. Obama is too chicken shit to express his true desires in public. The fact that a couple of republicans back this idea tells me there is still more house cleaning needed. Graham and McCain might as well have a great big "D" next to their names. They both love the leftists agenda. They support the global warming fraud. They support people breaking the law and entering our country illegally. They support making illegal aliens that commit felonies citizens. Basically they are no different than the run of the mill scumbag democrat that claims they are for the little guy.

Hmmm... (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/white-house-threatens-veto-defense-bill-over-detainee-rules/2011/11/17/gIQAvFiwVN_story.html)


“The Administration strongly objects to the military custody provision,” the White House said, noting that it could apply to people in the United States. That “would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets.”

The latest version of the National Defense Authorization Act left the Senate Armed Services Committee this week with amended detention provisions after the White House objected to the original version. But the measure continued to draw criticism from the White House

Also, it is worth noting that it is more than a "couple of republicans" who support this. It is ever Republican on the Armed Services Committee, which is somewhere around 28 people. The only ASC member to vote against the act was Democrat John Garamendi (here (http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=d3322ce0-70fd-4e43-a8d8-c99969b79072)). In the House, 227 Republicans voted for the act and 6 voted against it. 95 Democrats voted for it and 90 voted against it (here (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-375)).

But hey, you got to call Democrats scumbags and take token shots at immigration and global warming, that's something.