40 Members of Congress Protest ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill Legislation set for final vote Thursday Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com Wednesday, December 14, 2011 40 members of Congress have sent an urgent letter to House and Senate Armed Services Committee leaders protesting provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act that would legalize indefinite detention of American citizens without trial, as the revised version of the bill heads for a final vote on Thursday. “The Senate-passed version of the NDAA, S. 1867, contains Section 1031, which authorizes indefinite military detention of suspected terrorists without protecting U.S. citizens’ right to trial. We are deeply concerned that this provision could undermine the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth amendment rights of U.S. citizens who might be subjects of detention or prosecution by the military,” states the letter. Opposition to the bill has been bipartisan. While the letter is signed mostly by Democratic members of Congress, Republican representatives like Justin Amash, Ron Paul, and Rand Paul have also been vocal in their opposition. After a weekend of secret meetings, the final version of the bill emerged on Tuesday morning and is set to voted on before the end of the week. Issues the Obama administration had with the bill, which had nothing to do with indefinite detention (indeed it was the White House itself which removed language that would have protected Americans from Section 1031), now appear to have been settled. Both the ACLU and Human Rights Watch point out that the final version does nothing to protect American citizens against indefinite detention. “The sponsors of the bill monkeyed around with a few minor details, but all of the core dangers remain – the bill authorizes the president to order the military to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others found far from any battlefield, even in the United States itself,” said the ACLU’s Chris Anders. “The latest version of the defense authorization bill does nothing to address the bill’s core problems – legislated indefinite detention without charge and the militarization of law enforcement,” concurred HRW’s Andrea Prasow. Proponent of the legislation Senator Lindsay Graham ironically summed up the nightmare scenario the bill will codify into law – the complete evisceration of all Constitutional protections for U.S. citizens. “It is not unfair to make an American citizen account for the fact that they decided to help Al Qaeda to kill us all and hold them as long as it takes to find intelligence about what may be coming next,” remarked Graham. “And when they say, ‘I want my lawyer,’ you tell them, ‘Shut up. You don’t get a lawyer.’” Continued Comment: Here is a thought, since this bill turns the USA into a battle field and Obama is the commander of our armed forces. Whats to stop him from arresting his opposition, even in congress?
Just 40? Ugh, between this and SOPA, I'm absolutely sick to my stomach with the entire body politic. Any senator that supports a bill that makes it possible to indefinitely detain an American citizen ought to have his rank stripped and be removed from office. I don't often get motivated enough to write my sentaor/representative, but this and SOPA pushed that button. Sadly, both of my Senators are supporters... guess who I'm not voting for?
Well I hope "small-government republicans" are happy, at least Rush is, haven't heard him even mentioning this during last week....
I know... I'm just very angry about this and what seems like a media blackout on the topic. This ought to be the biggest news, on the front page of everything.... but ... alas. This should remind everyone that neither party is interested in your rights.
My Senators supported it to here is a letter from one: So She says indefinite detention of American citizens without due process is problematic , but wishes me a happy and healthy holiday season... WOW
It is amazing how the group of people who so passionately attempted to vilify Bush for the Patriot act (but of course were completely silent each time Obama extended it) are so quiet regarding this issue. I would have expected thread after thread after thread on the subject, as opposed to the occasional thread here and there. It really does make it look as though those people don't actually form their own opinions, but rather just mindlessly support whatever the party line happens to be even when it completely goes against what they so strongly claimed to believe in just a short time earlier. As for my take on 1867, I was only able to find one truly questionable phrase. From section 1031 The "any person" wording combined with the word "belligerent" leaves quite a lot of room for potential abuse. What constitutes a belligerent act? A person arguing for the legislation might say the the wording that proceeds the quote above makes it apply only to people connected to organized terror groups. I however believe the wording to be so ambiguously constructed that it could be applied to anyone who is deemed to be "belligerent".
Well and remember what we were told TSA, it was for the terrorists, but today the only people terrorizing is TSA against the American Citizens. "drop'm grandma"
It proves US is a tatalitarian country. The ruling class control this country with the intelligence and media. They select politicians through rigged election. (the intelligence control the election system). The make the election result reasonable by the fake poll because they control the media.
Agreed, but with a caveat. Take a look at the threads on SOPA or NDAA and see how few on either side want to condemn their own representatives. It's a problem with all partisans, they've stopped caring about issues and what their "team" does and spend all their time and energy regurgitating crap condemning the "bad guys". It's madness, it makes me physically ill. I just wish we could rise above the finger pointing and blame gaming and start pointing the fingers at those who represent us when they ignore the will of their constituents.
