The Sheeple are still Asleeple

This was an actual bill that was passed by the US Senate on December 1st. It is the latest NDAA bid for more domestic authority. Whether or not the Congress passes it or the President vetoes it as promised remains to be seen. If you are concerned about the scope of the NDAA's power over US citizens within the borders of the country and abroad, this bill, like all others, should be examined and discussed, I encourage you to do so. I believe it's an excuse to crack down and crush dissent, but that's just me.

The concern this bill has produced centers around vague and contradictory language (AKA - loopholes). Section 1032 - “the requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not apply to citizens of the United States.” But consider this from section 1031: “pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force,” “under the law of war”, people who either participated in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, or is a member or “substantial supporter” of al-Qaida, the Taliban, or “associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners” (can be detained indefinitely with no recourse to legal representation). This on the surface appears to rule out mandatory military detention for US citizens but note that it tends to rule in the idea that the baseline grant of detention authority in 1031 does in fact extend to citizens or there would be no need for an exclusion for citizens in section 1032, since the 1032 category is a subset of the larger 1031 category.

IMO the main reason to question the purpose of this bill should be obvious, there is virtually no support of al-Qaida or the Taliban or "associated forces" by US citizens at home or abroad. Opposition to this bill by important members of the intelligence community has been under reported - Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Patraeus, FBI Director Robert Mueller and NI Director James Clapper all lined up in opposition to the bill which they feel will actually get in the way of investigations of domestic terrorists. So the question remains - by what criteria is a US citizen to be judged as: "engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners" ? We cannot know for certain if the bill will be abused, but it's content has a grey area ripe for abuse, why allow that to pass?

Thanks for the correction, 7 out of 100... 7% of the Senate believes in our Constitutional "freedoms"! The other 93% wants us dead! Yes the silence of the Dem cheerleaders and the Obamabots is deafening. And of course we have operatives in Syria working to guarantee "freedom" to protest over there.

I wasn't trying to correct per se. I have seen various voting results on the internet. I had to go to the Senates page and check the roll call votes because I wasn't sure myself. Actually I really doesn't matter. What does matter is that the fact that the Senate rolled over on this is very disturbing. I don't know if I trust the House not to go along with it or Obama not to sign it. It is plain to me that the government exists for the government, not the people our freedoms or the Constitution. Too much power and reward at the high levels. As I said before, limited government.

Or a government of the people. So many crossroads, so many roadblocks.... stay informed and keep fighting!

Scouring the alt/news & prog blogs and sites there is a dearth of information and discussion about this. Nada. Not even the usual useless petitions to the prez are being circulated... Wow, nothing from my hipster friends on FB or anything. It's inexcusable, anyone with an internet connection should know what the hell is going on.

Yeah things are pretty quiet about this one. We need to keep an eye on where this disaster goes from here.

Well, if you visited the prog blogs and sites the past few days this was a buried story. I see that today the story is gaining more traction, even Forbes is sounding the alarm. The government 'disappearing' people is nothing new. But to blithely announce the suspension of any and all American's constitutional right to a fair trial is beyond shocking. For all the coverage and debate the Patriot Act sparked, this should be topic number 1 in America across the board.

Spencer Ackerman from Wired writes: "Weirder still, the bill’s chief architect, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), tried to persuade skeptics that the bill wasn’t so bad. His pitch? “The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States,” he said on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill would just let the government detain a citizen in military custody, not force it to do that."

In the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”
Check out his assessment of the bill:
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/does-the-ndaa-authorize-detention-of-us-citiz...

The only outspoken critics of the bill in the Senate were Al Franken (D) and Rand Paul (R), but then Franken went ahead and voted for it. Talk about protecting job security...

Personally I am convinced that this bill will be in place before the 2012 El-Auctions. Occupying the 2012 conventions would put the bill to the test. I'm sure Obama's decision to veto of this bill is weighing the potential of this bill to ensure limited disruptions on his re-election bid. Scary thought...

This is Glenn Greenwald's take on the idea of an Obama veto:

Let’s be very clear, though, about what the “veto threat” is and is not. All things considered, I’m glad the White House is opposing this bill rather than supporting it. But, with a few exceptions, the objections raised by the White House are not grounded in substantive problems with these powers, but rather in the argument that such matters are for the Executive Branch, not the Congress, to decide. In other words, the White House’s objections are grounded in broad theories of Executive Power. They are not arguing: it is wrong to deny accused Terrorists a trial. Instead they insist: whether an accused Terrorist is put in military detention rather than civilian custody is for the President alone to decide. Over and over, the White House’s statement emphasizes Executive power as the basis for its objections to Levin/McCain:

"Broadly speaking, the detention provisions in this bill micromanage the work of our experienced counterterrorism professionals, including our military commanders, intelligence professionals, seasoned counterterrorism prosecutors, or other operatives in the field. These professionals have successfully led a Government-wide effort to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qa’ida and its affiliates and adherents over two consecutive Administrations. The Administration believes strongly that it would be a mistake for Congress to overrule or limit the tactical flexibility of our Nation’s counterterrorism professionals."

It’s certainly possible that the administration is simply offering these Executive Power arguments as a fig leaf to hide their more politically difficult substantive objections to expanding the War on Terror. But that seems unlikely in the extreme, given that — as I have documented — most of these powers are ones expressly claimed and used already by the Obama administration. Does anyone believe that the same President who kills his own citizens without a whiff of due process or transparency is suddenly so concerned about the imperatives of due process?

I copied & pasted this from this article:
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/01/congress_endorsing_military_detention_a_new_aumf...

Right, the war on terror... Well, unless 'they' create an incident to legitimize this fascist bill to scare people into thinking we need it, it's all an absurd smokescreen to protect corporate interests. As for the counterterrorism experts - Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Patraeus, FBI Director Robert Mueller and NI Director James Clapper all lined up in opposition to the bill which they feel will actually get in the way of investigations of domestic terrorists.

....exactly my point. The 99% are about to get the pitchforks and torches...and the 1% think this is a game. I secretly hope the Repubs win so middle country, tea party idiots can be homeless and hungry before they think...."hey, maybe the black guy had a point". Most of these voters that are between the coasts are dooming the rest of us....

they have prepared for a revolution

I absolutely agree. I think there is still hope. though. It will take a long time, but a concerted effort by the _people_ can reverse much of the damage that has been done.
Step 1) A constitutional amendment that says corporations are not people and that money is not speech.

unfortunatly it will take a lot more than voting to git rid of this bunch.power is a drug most men cant control or get enough of

absolutely agree....however, I think the authors of the Constitution knew this, and that is why we have regular elections. If people would pay attention to what their representatives are doing, and continuously and responsibly vote them out, then the majority of our representatives would not have the opportunity to accrue the kind of destructive power we see at work in Senate Bill 1867.

Sad to say, this bill pre-empts the notion of electoral representation. The Senate clearly feels threatened enough by a challenge to their authority to act in behalf of corporate interests to strip you of your rights to challenge them and even kill you. The unspoken hidden agenda here is pretty obvious - the war on domestic terror is a straw man - both the FBI and the CIA told the Senate this bill was a bad idea, that basically there was virtually no threat of terrorism from the citizenry. So one must conclude this bill is designed to protect the banking cartel and multinational corporations who have taken control of our government.

....this is the only mechanism. they the idiots who vote for these type of idiots get what they deserve. I hate saying that for all the sane people here that live near these idiots....but how can you actually vote for they psychopaths? how in the world....sheeple idiots!!!

It kind of makes elections seem even more farcical doesn't it? The Senate clearly does not want Americans to challenge the government in any way, and now they can kill you for it.

You are absolutely correct on all counts, Flick. This is no longer America. Very scary. I believe the Occupy movement spurred this bill. They did not want the people rising up like this. The Occupy movement is not over and next year will be a long and ugly battle.

You are so right. We will see the intended purpose of passing this terrible bill come spring and into the fall El-Auctions alright. It will get ugly. In the meantime look for some faux terrorist plot to be uncovered while the real terrorist plot against Americans goes unreported, that is - the passage of this bill.

"In the meantime look for some faux terrorist plot to be uncovered while the real terrorist plot against Americans goes unreported, that is - the passage of this bill."

Agreed.