The NDAA Debate

[JerseyGTO]

Um am I the only one that sees this as fucked up..

Read !

http://nextgenjournal.com/2012/01/the-ndaa-debate/

[AbulletAway]

Why do you think it's fucked up?

[Cleo]

From the little I know about it NDAA does not apply to american citizens.

[яochard]

People seem to think that this bill gives the US military the right to arrest and detain American citizens. People seem to think this bill will lead to the US military busting down doors of innocent civilians and arresting them without due cause. What people don't understand is the the US military has it's own police force, both military police and investigative services, and they've had the legal ability to arrest civilians.

The military police acts very much like your local police, but generally speaking stay on military bases. However, they do operate off base during law enforcement issues concerning US military servicemen(women), mostly in military towns. For example, the military police in the Marines had an office in Charleston SC to deal with "drunken Marines" on leave, being as it was so close to the Marine Base. When I was in the Marines and lived off base, our houseing development was patrolled by the MPs. While the military police is not tasked with pursuing crimes committed by civilians, in the even they do witness a crime they have full law enforcement ability and can arrest anyone.

The investigative services are a part of the military branches, but are mostly civilian, and operate very similar to the FBI. For example, the United States Navy (and Marines) have NCIS - Naval Criminal Investigative Service. Being as crimes they investigate can be civilian against military personnel and also take place off of a military base, these investigative services come into direct contact with civilians on a regular basis.

I honestly don't understand what the problem is here. We already have the FBI, which is in fact a FEDERAL law enforcement agency.

[Mailman]

Why do you think it's fucked up?

because there is no video to tell us all what the story is about.. should know by know jersey cant read!

[JerseyGTO]

Why do you think it's fucked up?




This year’s bill, however, was different. One of the provisions included in the 2012 NDAA is one that allows for American citizens suspected of terrorism to be indefinitely detained in military custody without charge or trial.

That...


Who is to say they can't do whatever they want, whenever they want to anybody

[JerseyGTO]

because there is no video to tell us all what the story is about.. should know by know jersey cant read!

No I read the Article perfectly...

Who is to say the Government could claim jurisdiction and kick down someones door under suspicion and no proof and take them away for questioning..

[JerseyGTO]

From the little I know about it NDAA does not apply to american citizens.




This year’s bill, however, was different. One of the provisions included in the 2012 NDAA is one that allows for American citizens suspected of terrorism to be indefinitely detained in military custody without charge or trial.

When it says this how can't it apply to American Citizens

[Mailman]

No I read the Article perfectly...

serious business bro .... no place for laughs!!!

[JerseyGTO]

serious business bro .... no place for laughs!!!

Jackass :lol1:

[Reppy]

When Meathead suddenly stops posting here we'll know that they've been reading his posts and have kicked down his door and taken him away.

[aicoBitchinCamaro]

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." - James Madison (father of the US Constitution)

[Reppy]

I honestly don't understand what the problem is here.
The problem is that the rights you take for granted are being raped by other laws.

[JerseyGTO]

When Meathead suddenly stops posting here we'll know that they've been reading his posts and have kicked down his door and taken him away.

Actually Xclusive would be first then me..An as soon as he goes I'm runnin like hell

[Reppy]

Actually Xclusive would be first then me..An as soon as he goes I'm runnin like hell
If you can afford the plane ticket, I can make space in my garage for a fold out bed.

[яochard]

The problem is that the rights you take for granted are being raped by other laws.

Well, what rights? Law enforcement has pretty much always have the right to "detain" you for pretty much any reason they can come up with. Everyone knows that they can make up some silly charge and hold you for questioning or whatever. The new bill changes nothing.

There's no need to be scared over this. If you need something to be scared about, there are some very scary things out there - laws on the books. The President of the United States has some very scary fucking powers that can pretty much set aside any laws he wants.

[aicoBitchinCamaro]

If you can afford the plane ticket, I can make space in my garage for a fold out bed.

You do realize you're offering him a better deal than he has now right?

[JerseyGTO]

You do realize you're offering him a better deal than he has now right?

:lol1:

Actually Australia was always my first choice to run to..Hummmm

[Reppy]

Well, what rights? Law enforcement has pretty much always have the right to "detain" you for pretty much any reason they can come up with. Everyone knows that they can make up some silly charge and hold you for questioning or whatever. The new bill changes nothing.
Having the ability to abuse ones power is different than having a law allowing the same.

Habeas corpus.

[AbulletAway]

That...


Who is to say they can't do whatever they want, whenever they want to anybody

They already have been doing that. And, Obama said he signed the new act with that specific act taken out.

However, it doesn't matter. Since Bush started the Patriot Act, the government can detain anyone they suspect of terrorist activities for pretty much as long as the want already. This isn't really news. Just someone with a blog stirring up shit.

[JerseyGTO]

They already have been doing that. And, Obama said he signed the new act with that specific act taken out.

However, it doesn't matter. Since Bush started the Patriot Act, the government can detain anyone they suspect of terrorist activities for pretty much as long as the want already. This isn't really news. Just someone with a blog stirring up shit.

The Obama administration had threatened to veto the bill as long as it contained the indefinite detention provision, but changed course shortly before the final version was voted on by Congress.

In a letter to the public released following the signing of the document, Obama explained why he signed the bill with the indefinite detention provision attached to it. He states that his signature on the bill is necessary to continue funding for military and national security interests. Of the indefinite detention provision, he says that the version of the bill he signed had been revised to eliminate any provisions that would threaten the freedom of American citizens.

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley purports that despite what Obama says in his statement, the revisions made to the bill were merely rhetorical in nature, and that it ultimately provides the military with “extraordinary powers” to detain American citizens without providing them with a fair trial. Despite what Obama has said on the topic, Turley says that the powers imparted to the military and the Obama administration by way of this bill are cause for concern.

This is amplified by the fact that American citizens who are being investigated for being suspected of terrorism cannot inform others about the investigation without facing prosecution as per provisions of the PATRIOT Act. Coupled with the NDAA, a citizen wrongly suspected of terrorist activities could now theoretically be held in military detention for months without trial, and be released only to be restricted from taking legal action against his captors.

[aicoBitchinCamaro]

A rope won't break if you just snip one strand, and you won't even notice any difference in the rope, but if you slowly keep snipping the strands, eventually the rope will break, but by the time you notice, it will be too late.

[AbulletAway]

The Obama administration had threatened to veto the bill as long as it contained the indefinite detention provision, but changed course shortly before the final version was voted on by Congress.

In a letter to the public released following the signing of the document, Obama explained why he signed the bill with the indefinite detention provision attached to it. He states that his signature on the bill is necessary to continue funding for military and national security interests. Of the indefinite detention provision, he says that the version of the bill he signed had been revised to eliminate any provisions that would threaten the freedom of American citizens.

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley purports that despite what Obama says in his statement, the revisions made to the bill were merely rhetorical in nature, and that it ultimately provides the military with “extraordinary powers” to detain American citizens without providing them with a fair trial. Despite what Obama has said on the topic, Turley says that the powers imparted to the military and the Obama administration by way of this bill are cause for concern.

This is amplified by the fact that American citizens who are being investigated for being suspected of terrorism cannot inform others about the investigation without facing prosecution as per provisions of the PATRIOT Act. Coupled with the NDAA, a citizen wrongly suspected of terrorist activities could now theoretically be held in military detention for months without trial, and be released only to be restricted from taking legal action against his captors.


"Of the indefinite detention provision, he says that the version of the bill he signed had been revised to eliminate any provisions that would threaten the freedom of American citizens."

Fact. Or at least more likely to be a fact. All Presidents lie, Obama however, probably wasn't lying when he said that.


"Legal scholar Jonathan Turley purports that despite what Obama says in his statement, the revisions made to the bill were merely rhetorical in nature, and that it ultimately provides the military with “extraordinary powers” to detain American citizens without providing them with a fair trial. Despite what Obama has said on the topic, Turley says that the powers imparted to the military and the Obama administration by way of this bill are cause for concern."

Opinion or "rhetoric". The reason for concern was back when Bush pulled the Patriot Act out of his ass and convinced the weak and the stupid that it was needed.

Now Obama is at least attempting to restore more of our rights little by little without freaking out the conservatives and it pisses you off? The dude is fighting an uphill battle. The republicans for the most part fight him on every little thing because he's black. His own party has been fighting him because their too stupid to understand the ideals of party lines. Unlike republicans who are kinda like the Borg, one idea, everyone supports it, doesn't matter if it's a good idea or bad. Democrats, are too smart for their own good. If they don't like something, fuck the party, they will go with their ideas. It makes them the weaker party sadly. So basically with almost no support I am absolutely amazed the shit Obama has actually been able to get done. He just signs a law in to effect that at least on paper protects US citizens just a little bit more than they were the day before and it pisses you off? Jesus, the dude can't even get a thanks for trying and a pat on the back.