US Senate passed a bill that allows congress to suspend Habeas Corpus indefinitely

[#HBC | Mac]

edit: better sources:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011...ary-detention/
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-se...nite-detention

original post:

In a stunning move that has civil libertarians stuttering with disbelief, the U.S. Senate has just passed a bill that effectively ends the Bill of Rights in America.

This bill, passed late last night in a 93-7 vote, declares the entire USA to be a "battleground" upon which U.S. military forces can operate with impunity, overriding Posse Comitatus and granting the military the unchecked power to arrest, detain, interrogate and even assassinate U.S. citizens with impunity.

It's being called the most traitorous act ever witnessed in the Senate, and the language of the bill is cleverly designed to make you think it doesn't apply to Americans, but toward the end of the bill it essentially says it can apply to Americans "if we want it to."

Even WIRED magazine was outraged at this bill, reporting:

...the detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but 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.”

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/senate-military-detention/

The passage of this law is nothing less than an outright declaration of WAR against the American People by the military-connected power elite. If this is signed into law, it will shred the remaining tenants of the Bill of Rights and unleash upon America a total military dictatorship, complete with secret arrests, secret prisons, unlawful interrogations, indefinite detainment without ever being charged with a crime, the torture of Americans and even the "legitimate assassination" of U.S. citizens on right here on American soil!

If you have not yet woken up to the reality of the police state we've been warning you about, I hope you realize we are fast running out of time. Once this becomes law, you have no rights whatsoever in America -- no due process, no First Amendment speech rights, no right to remain silent, nothing.

Read my red alert warning on this urgent development at:

http://www.naturalnews.com/034291_SB_1867_war_on_terror.html>

source: http://www.salem-news.com/articles/december022011/bill-rights-ends.php

what the ****

 

[1048576]

Source refers to US as a police state. Assuredly not credible. Wait until a less sensationalist article comes along before y'all go on thinking the US is using 1984 as an instruction manual.

 

[#HBC | Mac]

that article linked to a less sensational one:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/senate-military-detention/

and just because you think it might be sensational doesn't mean you should disregard everything the article talks about. There assertion of the US turning into a police state might not be too off base, when you consider things such as: The US making use of interior checkpoints 100 miles away from country borders, the extension of the patriot act, the us being able to detain indefinitely and even execute american citizens without a trial, the hard crack down on peaceful ows protesters. They surely have an argument there and it's clear that our freedoms are gradually being stripped from us.

I'd rather you not pick one line from the article to try to completely discredit as well as using hyperbole yourself to make your point.

The American Civil Liberties Union also has issues with the bill: http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senate-rejects-amendment-banning-indefinite-detention

edit: i changed the title to a much less alarmist one that actually describes what the bill is doing.

 

[etecoon]

Source refers to US as a police state.

regardless of whether or not it is yet, the groundwork has been laid which is already much farther than we should have tolerated. it's pathetic how most american's truthfully don't care about their rights. when I read things like this half of me thinks the people as a collective entity would completely deserve it if this did become a police state

 

[Spelt]

I care less about this than I should because I plan to move out of the US asap anyways.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I've read a few articles about this, and having seen multiple sources claim this gives the U.S. government the right to "murder" civilians, I was skeptical. I'm currently in the process of reading the actual bill (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c112:2:./temp/~c112YlWO2A::), and I'm having a hard time locating anything useful or relevant.

Closest I found was a section about military custody (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:2:./temp/~c112YlWO2A:e551744:) which talks about being a member of al-Qaeda or attempting to carry out attacks on U.S. Then it goes on to say:

"(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."

So, if anyone can help find the section causing all the uproar, I'd love to read it. I'm, admittedly, pretty bad at interpreting senate bills (I've only tried once before, with the healthcare bill).

 

[Jam Stunna]

I've tried to find an article that describes this bill in less frothing-at-the-mouth alarmism, but no such luck. I'll wait to believe the hype.

 

[#HBC | Mac]

some guy on reddit gives a seemingly solid summary/analysis of the bill
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/co...ssed_a_bill_973_to_remove_the_bill_of/c34wh17

 

[Melomaniacal]

I just finished reading all the relevant parts in the bill. Bottom line:

Section 1031 of the bill allowed for detainment of U.S. citizens. Section 1031 was voted AGAINST by senate (45-55). The current version of the bill only allows for indefinite detainment of AL-Qaeda members and other terrorists. It explicitly does not apply to U.S. citizens.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Man it's a good thing none of us care what the aclu or wired says right?

.____.

 

[M@v]

I just finished reading all the relevant parts in the bill. Bottom line:

Section 1031 of the bill allowed for detainment of U.S. citizens. Section 1031 was voted AGAINST by senate (45-55). The current version of the bill only allows for indefinite detainment of AL-Qaeda members and other terrorists. It explicitly does not apply to U.S. citizens.

Still kinda scary it barely failed.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Still kinda scary it barely failed.

Actually, I looked into it more, and that section still remains in the bill. They voted to amend the section, but barely lost. The bill is moving to the house now, where I hope they will amend that section. Obama said he would veto the bill unless it was changed.

However, I think it's important to note that habeas corpus can already be suspended if authority sees it fit. It's in the constitution. This doesn't really change too much.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Well, if this bill ever gets passed and kills off all of our rights, Canada is just right around the corner... hell, even Mexico will look good (maybe).

 

[Master Xanthan]

Well, if this bill ever gets passed and kills off all of our rights, Canada is just right around the corner... hell, even Mexico will look good (maybe).

Yeah, I agree with this, lol.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Mexico will never look good and lolololol good luck trying to get that many people into Canada. Sure.

 

[Glöwworm]

I wonder if people actually sticked to their word when they said they would move to Canada if Obama got elected president.

 

[Falconv1.0]

They didn't, they probably couldn't get in even if they wanted to. I don't know why everyone seems to assume Canada would just take hella people if things went to ****.

 

[#HBC | Mac]

instead of just tryna run away, you guys should try to find out how you can stop these ****ty things from happening to the government. Do what you can to help

 

[Claire Diviner]

They didn't, they probably couldn't get in even if they wanted to. I don't know why everyone seems to assume Canada would just take hella people if things went to ****.

Well, then there are other options. Canada is just next door. If jumping the border fails, there's always travel overseas... even if it means swimming.

instead of just tryna run away, you guys should try to find out how you can stop these ****ty things from happening to the government. Do what you can to help

Civil war, I guess. Anarchists vs. the government. That seems to be a last resort effort if things really hit the bottom of the **** barrel.

 

[#HBC | Mac]

its a depressing to think that civil war is the only solution to the problem. i can't agree with that notion and I believe there are other ways.

 

[etecoon]

the political system is broken, there is no other way and yet at the same time the american people are apathetic about their rights and are very conceited, really there is no solution to it

fleeing to the neighboring country in the event of a military takeover isn't an effective strategy either...

 

[Master Xanthan]

its a depressing to think that civil war is the only solution to the problem. i can't agree with that notion and I believe there are other ways.

I guess politics would be the other way. But there's a lot of corruption in politics, seems like it would be difficult to get anything good done.

 

[Falconv1.0]

I love how many younger people I know bring up revolution or some **** without knowing anything about how to make real change. Oh and, yeah, that's totally going to work. You're just gonna get the military to not destroy us and take control of an economy you don't understand and the American populace is gonna think that's chill.

God I ****ing hate people.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Well, then there are other options. Canada is just next door. If jumping the border fails, there's always travel overseas... even if it means swimming.


Civil war, I guess. Anarchists vs. the government. That seems to be a last resort effort if things really hit the bottom of the **** barrel.

LOL, anarchist forming into a military would be against their beliefs

 

[Master Xanthan]

Civil War would definitely be a bad idea. What you need to do is get the right people into politics. Unfortunately no such politicians exist, lol.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Hardcore rant

I'm really sick of this hopelessly pessimistic attitude about American politics.

So the senate votes something in that we don't like. Guess who put those people into office? We did. Guess who can see how they voted? We can. If you don't like it, look at how your senators are voting, and if you don't like it, stop ****ing voting for them. The only reason this doesn't work is because the majority of the country would rather sit on their *** and complain about how our government sucks and is corrupt instead of taking 30 minutes of their time to look at their congressmen voting records. It's all public information.

It's really that simple. Politicians do what they can to get elected. Politicians knowing what we want and don't want doesn't matter if they are confident that the people aren't going to actually notice when they are doing something wrong. If people actually voted according to how congressmen voted, it would be political suicide to vote against the people. However, it isn't political suicide because the majority of people would rather sit on their *** and complain without ever actually seeing who's causing the problems and doing something about it.

Civil War would definitely be a bad idea. What you need to do is get the right people into politics. Unfortunately no such politicians exist, lol.

Like this ****. You know, you can see how our congressmen vote and what they believe in. You can see who voted against this bill. You can see who voted to have it amended. You can see who is on our side, and you can see that not all of our politicians are corrupt. However, it's much easier to sit on your *** and say "all politicians are corrupt, I won't even bother."

its a depressing to think that civil war is the only solution to the problem. i can't agree with that notion and I believe there are other ways.

Yes, there are other ways. It's a pretty easy one, too. All you have to do is stop being a lazy, ignorant ****, get off your *** and make an actual informed vote.
(Not directed at you, directed at the general population)

 

[Claire Diviner]

LOL, anarchist forming into a military would be against their beliefs

And that is the practical joke.

Honestly, no matter where we go, corruption will be everywhere. If this bill destroys our rights, we can learn to live with it, and be under the oppression of "Big Brother". Choose to fight it, and risk dying to a corrupt military and police force. Choose to flee it, and be labeled chicken ****. Honestly, pick your poison. Personally, I'd rather flee and be labeled chicken **** and not make a difference if it means I get to live to see another day without being under the boot heel of a corrupt government.

 

[Melomaniacal]

This bill needs to stop being blown out of proportion. Just for reference, here's the section causing all the fuss:

"(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."

And again, here's what the constitution already says:
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

Not much is being changed. So, is the bill bad? Probably, yeah. Is it ****ING HORRIBLE HOLY **** BIG BROTHER TAKING OUR RIGHTS WE'RE DOOMED. For the love of god, NO.

 

[Claire Diviner]

This bill needs to stop being blown out of proportion. Just for reference, here's the section causing all the fuss:

"(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."

And again, here's what the constitution already says:
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

Not much is being changed. So, is the bill bad? Probably, yeah. Is it ****ING HORRIBLE HOLY **** BIG BROTHER TAKING OUR RIGHTS WE'RE DOOMED. For the love of god, NO.

And that is the magic of a little word that can make a big difference... a word called "if".

 

[Melomaniacal]

And that is the magic of a little word that can make a big difference... a word called "if".

I'm sorry, I don't follow...

"If" what?

Never mind, got it. Well, you can read the bill any time you want and decide yourself how much weight you want to put in that "if." All I'm saying is that this bill is causing way too much panic.

 

[Claire Diviner]

I'm sorry, I don't follow...

"If" what?

Never mind, got it. Well, you can read the bill any time you want and decide yourself how much weight you want to put in that "if." All I'm saying is that this bill is causing way too much panic.

I agree that it's causing too much panic, but you also have to remember exactly what country this is. America has more conspiracy theorists than one may believe, so it should come as no surprise.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I agree that it's causing too much panic, but you also have to remember exactly what country this is. America has more conspiracy theorists than one may believe, so it should come as no surprise.

No, it's not a surprise. That doesn't make it any more okay.
Also:
http://paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=399

 

[Claire Diviner]

No, it's not a surprise. That doesn't make it any more okay.

Assuming I implied it was okay...

Also:
http://paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=399

Oh, look, the bill failed. I suppose we can expect this thread to conclude soon then?

 

[Melomaniacal]

Assuming I implied it was okay...
Oh, look, the bill failed. I suppose we can expect this thread to conclude soon then?

I wasn't assuming you implied it was okay, I just tossed that in to further justify my previous post. It doesn't have to be directed at you personally.

And no, I doubt the thread will conclude. Although his website says the detainee section was amended, it appears to still be in the bill, although that could just be them being slow to update it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I'm really sick of this hopelessly pessimistic attitude about American politics.

So the senate votes something in that we don't like. Guess who put those people into office? We did. Guess who can see how they voted? We can. If you don't like it, look at how your senators are voting, and if you don't like it, stop ****ing voting for them. The only reason this doesn't work is because the majority of the country would rather sit on their *** and complain about how our government sucks and is corrupt instead of taking 30 minutes of their time to look at their congressmen voting records. It's all public information.

*sigh*

K, now look at the voting records of the other guy. I wish it was as simple as "vote for someone else". But here's the thing: it isn't.

 

[Luigitoilet]

I wonder if a mass support movement for a completely independent third party is at all feasible in the distant future/ever.

Melo: politicians go back on their campaign ideals all the time. why do you think Obama has become so reviled?

 

[Melomaniacal]

The point is that politicians get away with what they want because we let them. Obviously it's not a simple problem that will be solved in one election. Over time we could only make congress better, and if politicians know that they can't get away with their bull****, they will eventually stop.

 

[M@v]

http://www.nationaljournal.com//nat...threat-of-defense-authorization-bill-20111214

Apparently Obama's veto threat was dropped because it was determined this bill won't hinder the president's ability to intervene on these affairs. Or at least that's what his advisors told him.

 

[etecoon]

I wonder if a mass support movement for a completely independent third party is at all feasible in the distant future/ever.

a third party can also be bought. it's not a problem with the republican or democratic parties in particular(though they have plenty of problems of their own), the system itself has been cracked.

 

[Master Xanthan]

http://www.nationaljournal.com//nat...threat-of-defense-authorization-bill-20111214

Apparently Obama's veto threat was dropped because it was determined this bill won't hinder the president's ability to intervene on these affairs. Or at least that's what his advisors told him.

Wow.......