Out of Pod Experience

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/senate-military-detention/
Bill Text: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.1867:

Personally, if I were the President, aka The Commander-in-Chief, I would let the bill pass and then lock up every single member of congress who voted for it. Then go on TV and explain to the country what just happened and tell the people to get ready to elect replacement representatives, preferably ones whose first act will be to repeal the unlimited detention provisions.

Hi, Canada here.

We are ready to restart the Underground Railroad anytime.

Yeah 'google it' or 'click the link the other guy posted' is pretty impossible for someone who lets sensationalist journalism lead them around by the nose. Neither of us have read this yet. You have already passed judgement that your government wants to end your rights?

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf

Download the PDF turn to page 427. The gist is below however.

Subtitle D—Detainee Matters
16 SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED
17 FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN
18 COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AU19
THORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
20 (a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the author21
ity of the President to use all necessary and appropriate
22 force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military
23 Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the
24 Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered per427
† S 1867 ES
1 sons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition
2 under the law of war.
3 (b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under
4 this section is any person as follows:
5 (1) A person who planned, authorized, com6
mitted, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred
7 on September 11, 2001, or harbored those respon8
sible for those attacks.
9 (2) A person who was a part of or substantially
10 supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces
11 that are engaged in hostilities against the United
12 States or its coalition partners, including any person
13 who has committed a belligerent act or has directly
14 supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
15 forces.
16 (c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The dis17
position of a person under the law of war as described
18 in subsection (a) may include the following:
19 (1) Detention under the law of war without
20 trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the
21 Authorization for Use of Military Force.
22 (2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United
23 States Code (as amended by the Military Commis24
sions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–
25 84)).
428
† S 1867 ES
1 (3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or
2 competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
3 (4) Transfer to the custody or control of the
4 person’s country of origin, any other foreign coun5
try, or any other foreign entity.
6 (d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is in7
tended to limit or expand the authority of the President
8 or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military
9 Force.
10 (e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be
11 construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
12 the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
13 aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
14 captured or arrested in the United States.
15 (f) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.—
16 The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress
17 regarding the application of the authority described in this
18 section, including the organizations, entities, and individ19
uals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of
20 subsection (b)(2).
21 SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
22 (a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF
23 WAR.—
24 (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para25
graph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States
429
† S 1867 ES
1 shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who
2 is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by
3 the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public
4 Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition
5 under the law of war.
6 (2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in
7 paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose de8
tention is authorized under section 1031 who is de9
termined—
10 (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-
11 Qaeda or an associated force that acts in co12
ordination with or pursuant to the direction of
13 al-Qaeda; and
14 (B) to have participated in the course of
15 planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
16 attack against the United States or its coalition
17 partners.
18 (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For
19 purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a per20
son under the law of war has the meaning given in
21 section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise
22 described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be
23 made unless consistent with the requirements of sec24
tion 1033.
430
† S 1867 ES
1 (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.—The
2 Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the
3 Secretary of State and the Director of National In4
telligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if
5 the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in
6 writing that such a waiver is in the national security
7 interests of the United States.
8 (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
9 AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
10 (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The require11
ment to detain a person in military custody under
12 this section does not extend to citizens of the United
13 States.
14 (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The require15
ment to detain a person in military custody under
16 this section does not extend to a lawful resident
17 alien of the United States on the basis of conduct
18 taking place within the United States, except to the
19 extent permitted by the Constitution of the United
20 States.

The relevant paragraphs appear to be:

1031 (e) AUTHORITIES. Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

and

1032 (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.

Apparently, nobody in the media or government actually READS the frakking bills anymore before protesting them, or voting on them, respectively.

Journalism is dead. Dead dead dead. Also, dead.

it really doesn't seem like this huge blow to freedom. pretty much as long as you don't make the government suspicious of you being a terrorist you're fine.

*put on those tinfoil hats!*

I am a free man.

I live a free life.

I am free to live by the law.
I am free to break the law.
I am free to suffer the consequences of my actions.


Their laws do not concern me too much. The ones I agree with, most all of us can agree with. Don't steal. Don't kill. Don't drive 120mph down main st. at noon.

The ones I don't agree with, that most question at the minimum, are not justice but social engineering. And as a free man in an allegedly free society, I don't acknowledge their validity or authority (though I do recognize the governments ability to enforce them as if they were valid and just)

It is no secret that our legislators do not legislate just laws.
Our courts make politically charged decisions making them the very definition of injustice.
Our executives have time and time again proven themselves to be capable of little more than damage control. Their ability to plot a course of success for our society is akin to a captain trying to steer his ship in a hurricane.

Corruption is rife. Our system that used to promote freedom and liberty has become a means of harnessing the populace for purposes of profit and labor. What once existed to serve and facilitate us (of by and for the people) now is a system of control, and we exist to serve it.

They don't need this legislation to do whatever the hell they want to. All they need is a judge to say it's ok at the end of the day. Legislation like this isn't made to trample your rights, they can do that anyways. Legislation like this is a circus, political maneuvering, rhetoric stamped on budgetary policy.

We don't have rights in this country... we have privileges. Gun control is completely unconstitutional (George Washington himself felt that any weapon available to the military should be available to civilians). Any law, any restricted activity that doesn't negatively impact another persons rights could be viewed as a violation of the first amendment. Any law that sidesteps the fourth amendment is (obviously) unconstitutional... see: our entire concept of national security and law enforcement. Any unconstitutional law is an assault on our society and our ideals.... and by my measure these types of laws have been commonplace since at least the dawn of the 20th century.

Rights by definition cannot be taken away.
We haven't had rights for quite some time.
This shouldn't be news to anyone.

The only questions that remain for us to debate are:

-how much is too much? when do they hit the tipping point where society must sadly and violently thrust itself upon the machinations of government to break it? people romanticize this idea, but believe me if it ever happens in the US, it will be the worst 30 years you could ever imagine, rife with death, disease, fear and division.

-what can we do to pull it out of the fire now? can we stop the money in our government? can we break the death-grip of greed our political parties and meglomaniacal international "corporations" have on us and the system?

I don't like it, but I'd prefer almost anything to the reality that will occur when we do what must be done to purge the system and try to restore our ideals of freedom, liberty and justice. Ignorance is bliss, like most Americans I'll consume myself with entertainment, distraction, work. I don't want to see the reality of revolution visited upon my generation. I continue to hope that we will use the tools our founding fathers gave us to fix this government peacefully.

But should society as a whole decide enough is enough, there is little they can do to stop us. The same police you see tear gassing protestors, the same military that we are afraid can haul us away in the middle of the night.... these are made of Americans, with families and loved ones and friends just like the rest of us. Should revolution occur, I believe we would all stand ready and together.

The only thing I fear is that instead of revolution, the men behind the curtain recognize the winds of revolution before they occur and instead steer us into civil war. Happy to pick up the pieces that are left. It has been their strategy thus far, divide and conquer. It is the primary function that our two party system has evolved toward.



Whatever happens, remember this:

We get exactly what we deserve.

We can point blame all day, but if we are honest, our laziness, our ignorance, our apathy, our self-delusion.... this is what has poisoned our government, and stripped us of our rights. No one TOOK our society and government away from us... we gave it away. Left it on the curb and cared little who came to pick it up.

Baby-boomers and nearly everything else that came along after the 'greatest generation', millions and generations of Americans decided they were tired of standing up, and sat down. We are to blame,

we who play video games and watch tv and movies and spew rhetoric on the internet, but do not go out into that world and make it change, we are to blame. We who observe life, but not live it. Idealists and cynics alike, with a fury of intention and emotion but a completely flaccid sense of action and ability. You, and them, and most certainly me. We who say, but do not do, are to blame. And we get exactly what we deserve.

This entire bill is unConstitutional. To quote the Fifth Amendment:



Bolded relevant portions.

The wording clearly states "person" meaning anyone held by the government of the United States. This does not apply only to citizens of the United States, but anyone detained by the government. Yes, being held at GITMO is considered being in federal custody, despite what they say.

The problem with this law is that it completely eliminates Posse Comitatus. This is not conjecture, this is fact. The President of the United States and the State Department can, at any time, remove someone's citizenship status if they are considered an "enemy". This administration, in particular, has made mundane things such as buying camping gear a possible terrorist. The Department of Home;and Security in 2009 even sent out a memo, "warning" law enforcement agencies that returning Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom vets are considered "highly likely" to become "right-wing extremists", akin to Timothy McVeigh. Of course, people didn't hear about this until Fox News said something, and then they started backtracking.

Hell, even a cop from Colorado said the FBI was giving classes on "what to look for" in possible terrorists. One of the "signs"? Having a bumpers sticker supporting States' Rights!

Stewart Rhodes, an attorney and founder of the organization Oath Keepers wrote a paper in 2004, pointing to the very real path the country was heading, and this was one of the markers. We are, at this moment, faced with a choice: to lose our rights and liberties, or to stand up for what we believe.

The last time Americans were placed in this position, we were colonists. And we all know what happened when we got backed into this corner...

The idea that the founding fathers expected the full constitution to apply to every enemy combatant in a war on our soil, after having won a guerrilla war here, is complete nonsense.

This bill and the problems with it are about poor wording by the authors and nothing more.

Trying to outline what to do with those enemies when they make it onto our soil is not easy. Talking about what to do with enemies in war is always it's own little war between people sitting comfortably and people trying to kill eachother. I challenge anyone in this thread to write a bullet proof bill outlining what an 'enemy combatant' or 'terrorist' is when they're hiding among our populace.

Kudos to the man for noticing the implications and turning the bill around, but turning this into some bullshit about our government trying to end our rights as citizens is counter productive. We need to think along the lines of Alia's post and find a better way to define enemy combatants to keep paperwork straight, not raise torches and pitchforks in defense of some phantom evil that wants to put us all in prison.

A couple questions:

-What is it about our constitution and the rights afforded to our citizenry that would inhibit our ability to bring justice to anyone else on our soil. Another way of saying it: What impotence do we introduce by holding all people (citizens, combatants, otherwise) under the same rights, laws and judicial process?

-What right do you think you have today that couldn't be taken away from you tomorrow? And if the answer is none (as I believe it to be) how are they rights if they can be taken away?

The graying of the lines is their tool to strip us of our freedoms and liberties. It's how you turn a right into a privilege.

Even if they do not intend it or act upon it, once that precedence is set SOMEONE WILL. I don't think it's counter productive, I think it's very real and inevitable. Such discussion is the only peaceful vigilance we have to protect our so-called rights.

And if you think graying a previous black and white line is harmless, just wait. Because one day you'll see them label someone "black", and while everyone else says "no, it's clearly "white" "... the only needed response is "it's gray, it's close enough" .... (hopefully that isn't too vague to make sense and I intend no racial connotations)