RunRyder RC
 8  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 1412 views
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterOff Topics News & Politics › Ron Paul: Defense Bill Establishes Martial Law In​America
12-13-2011 10:17 PM  5 years agoPost 1
albatross

rrApprentice

Texas, Houston area

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Top tier presidential candidate Ron Paul has decried the ‘indefinite detention’ provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, warning that it represents an arrogant, bold and dangerous attempt to establish martial law in America.

Speaking with the Alex Jones Show today, Congressman Paul went on the offensive against the bill, which is set to be signed into law by President Obama later this week.

Section 1031 of the NDAA bill, which itself defines the entirety of the United States as a “battlefield,” allows American citizens to be snatched from the streets, carted off to a foreign detention camp and held indefinitely without trial. The bill states that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” faces indefinite detention, but no trial or evidence has to be presented, the White House merely needs to make the accusation.

Paul said he saw significance in “the announcement and the arrogance of it all,” making reference to the Obama administration’s claim that it can now assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world and noting that the passage of the NDAA bill is an effort to codify the policy into law.

“This is a giant step – this should be the biggest news going right now – literally legalizing martial law,” said Paul, noting that the subject did not come up at all in any of the Republican debates.

The Congressman also decried the “arrogance” of an attempt to push through via a voice vote an amendment that would have still authorized indefinite detention even if a detainee was found innocent after a trial. The amendment was narrowly defeated by his son, Senator Rand Paul.

“This is big,” emphasized Paul, adding “This step where they can literally arrest American citizens and put them away without trial….is arrogant and bold and dangerous.”

Despite speculation that the Obama administration would veto the bill, it emerged yesterday that it was the White House itself which worked to remove language from the bill that would have protected American citizens from indefinite detention under Section 1031.

The administration has been working with lawmakers to alter a separate provision, Section 1032, which pertains to the military being required to take custody of individuals.

With the administration’s concerns over Section 1032 now largely resolved, a revised and final version of the bill could be signed into law before the end of the week.

“The conferees said they plan to bring the bill to the House floor for a vote as soon as Wednesday afternoon and to the Senate soon thereafter,” reports Politico.

Despite the revisions, the bill still contains language that allows Americans to be detained without trial at a detention center anywhere in the world.

Republican Congressman Justin Amash has again warned that lawmakers are attempting to mislead the American people by claiming U.S. citizens are exempt from the most dangerous provisions of the bill.

“Pres. Obama and many Members of Congress believe the President ALREADY has the authority the bill grants him. Legally, of course, he does not. This language was inserted to keep proponents and opponents of the bill appeased, while permitting the President to assert that the improper power he has claimed all along is now in statute,” writes Amash.

“They will say that American citizens are specifically exempted under the following language in Sec. 1032: “The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States. Don’t be fooled. All this says is that the President is not REQUIRED to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial. It still PERMITS him to do so,” warns the Congressman.

Amash is encouraging Americans to contact their representatives and sign a petition expressing their opposition to the NDAA bill, calling it “one of the most anti-liberty pieces of legislation of our lifetime.”

Click here to listen to the interview with Ron Paul in full.

...my handle backwards is how I feel about current world affairs...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-14-2011 08:30 PM  5 years agoPost 2
doc heli

rrNovice

mi usa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

we need ron paul for prez so bad right now before we are all living in united gulag of America

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
12-14-2011 09:16 PM  5 years agoPost 3
es1co2bar3

rrKey Veteran

winnetka california

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Rand paul is jumping on this issue as if he have son outside usa that's a terrorist. He's saying it isn't ok to kill a american terrorist who is planning to kill american outside the usa
without a trial,

well obama you have my green light and the vote for it,

kill the dam terrorist where/ever he sh!T dine or sleep with
or whitout a trial, before he strike and cause suffering to
someone family,

if you think ran paul is right on the issue'
take a 2nd look" at sep 11 2001} i hope it still in your memory,

maybe this's why bush have binladden on the run for so long because
he want to bring him to trial,

yes obama you call the shot when/ever you see these bastard in your crossair,

you have' kill far more of these mad dog" than any president in history,

I was waiting on some honey but there aren't no Queen bee,

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-14-2011 10:35 PM  5 years agoPost 4
ILIKE'M

rrNovice

Texas

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill Heads To​Obama’s Desk As White House Drops Veto​Threat

Establishment media and neo-cons still pretend NDAA doesn’t apply to American citizens

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, December 14, 2011

UPDATE: Obama has dropped his threat to veto the bill and is now expected to sign it into law. Remember – it was Obama’s White House that demanded the law apply to U.S. citizens in the first place.

The bill which would codify into law the indefinite detention without trial of American citizens is about to be passed and sent to Obama’s desk to be signed into law, even as some news outlets still erroneously report that the legislation does not apply to U.S. citizens.

“The House on Wednesday afternoon approved the rule for the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), setting up an hour of debate and a vote in the House later this afternoon,” reports the Hill.

Mainstream news outlets like The Hill, as well as neo-con blogs like Red State, are still pretending the indefinite detention provision doesn’t apply to American citizens, even though three of the bill’s primary sponsors, Senator Carl Levin, Senator John McCain, and Senator Lindsey Graham, said it does during speeches on the Senate floor.

“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.’”

As Levin said last week, it was the White House itself that demanded Section 1031 apply to American citizens.

“The language which precluded the application of Section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section,” said Levin, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

Senator McCain also told Rand Paul during a hearing on the bill that American citizens could be declared an enemy combatant, sent to Guantanamo Bay and detained indefinitely, “no matter who they are.”

Quite how those still in denial could even entertain the notion that the bill would not apply to American citizens when the Obama administration is already enforcing a policy of state assassination and killing American citizens it claims are “terrorists,” without having to present any evidence or go through any legal process, is beyond naive.

With the White House having largely resolved its concerns with the bill, which had nothing to do with the ‘indefinite detention’ provision, Obama could put pen to paper as early as tomorrow on a law that if recognized will nullify the bill of rights – ironically tomorrow is “Bill of Rights Day”.

RELATED: The Indefinite Detention Bill DOES Apply to American Citizens on U.S. Soil

Watch at YouTube

Watch at YouTube

Watch at YouTube

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-14-2011 10:36 PM  5 years agoPost 5
philip 01

rrElite Veteran

ft worth

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

they used to call this 'kooky conspiracy talk'.

not so much anymore...

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-14-2011 10:40 PM  5 years agoPost 6
es1co2bar3

rrKey Veteran

winnetka california

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Where was obama when the detaine got sent to guantannmo bay
and how long were they there before obama took office so who was keeping them whitout a trial,
did they get a trial yet? and who's blocking them from getting a trial
i hope no one say the DEM

I was waiting on some honey but there aren't no Queen bee,

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-14-2011 11:41 PM  5 years agoPost 7
Kramer

rrApprentice

LaPorte,In.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

never mind

http://www.facebook.com/groups/1029857 http://northern-indiana-modelers-association.synthasite.com/

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-15-2011 05:13 PM  5 years agoPost 8
Dwntyme

rrApprentice

U.S.A.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Why do you think Obummer is bringing all the Troops home?
he is peraring for all out revolt against this law once it is in effect..

Love a Twitchy Heli.... :) and Remmington Model 700

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-15-2011 05:27 PM  5 years agoPost 9
Kramer

rrApprentice

LaPorte,In.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I don't think any one actually said that the troops were coming "home",just that they were leaving Iraqu

http://www.facebook.com/groups/1029857 http://northern-indiana-modelers-association.synthasite.com/

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-15-2011 06:11 PM  5 years agoPost 10
fla heli boy

rrKey Veteran

cape coral, florida

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

we're just bunching them up, getting them ready to go into another war. It's proven history that a presidents approval rating goes thru the roof in the early days of a new war. Which would time out nicely with the elections.
But I think they'd get that wrong this time because I think we're pretty fed up as a nation with policing the world and getting our kids blown up for nothing. I know I am.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 12:57 AM  5 years agoPost 11
Dragon2115

rrKey Veteran

New England

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Ok so who wants to take off their tinfoil hat and actually read what is (and is not) in the bill? If this is the best Ron Paul has to offer then I fail to see why anyone is impressed with him. He conveniently leaves out Section 1032 which further defines Section 1031. He also conveniently takes a partial line, "including any person who has committed a belligerent act", and uses it completely out of context. Based on stuff like this he's either a liar or stupid, just like the rest of the pols in DC. This is about the detention and definition of who is, and who isn't, a prisoner of war under the law that authorized the use of military force after the 9/11 attacks.

From the NDAA:

Subtitle D—Detainee Matters

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(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.

(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(e) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.—
The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of subsection (b)(2).

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined—
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.—The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(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.

(c) IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.
(2) ELEMENTS.—The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:
(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.
(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.
(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a)(2) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation session which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing session.
(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.
(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a)(4) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.

(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.

And oh btw, this is part of the Authorization For Use Of Military Force which terminates when the war in Afghanistan ends. That means so too does this provision.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:15 AM  5 years agoPost 12
Metalizer

rrApprentice

Canton, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Dragon: The tin foil hat looney cracks are no longer norm. Just because your Country will have cameras and sticks cramed up your a$$ does'nt mean Americans will have it. We are not stupid and can see whats going on.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:16 AM  5 years agoPost 13
philip 01

rrElite Veteran

ft worth

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

stepping stone.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:19 AM  5 years agoPost 14
Dragon2115

rrKey Veteran

New England

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

We are not stupid and can see whats going on.
But you're still not smart enough, or observant enough, to notice the difference between England and New England in a location tag.

Bravo! Carry on...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:21 AM  5 years agoPost 15
es1co2bar3

rrKey Veteran

winnetka california

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

proven history that a presidents approval rating goes thru the roof in the early days of a new war. Which would time out nicely with the elections.
the president poll number is going trough the roof' that'd just what
the republican voter see,

the president will win by a super land slide, this time.

american will not vote for romney the mormom cult and gingrich doesn't have president material.

same thing when [mc,pyane} pick sarah palin as a running mate'

he did have a chance but he kill the voter vibe after he pick her"

The republican line up for 2012 isn't fit for president

so obummer get a automatic win,

I was waiting on some honey but there aren't no Queen bee,

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:21 AM  5 years agoPost 16
Metalizer

rrApprentice

Canton, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

O my bad. Still, just saying LOL

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:26 AM  5 years agoPost 17
Dragon2115

rrKey Veteran

New England

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Look, the fact is this is about prisoners of war and nothing else. Anybody claiming indefinite detention is being misleading for their own purposes because it's right there in black and white,
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
Right there, anybody held under this provision will have to be released once the war in Afghanistan is over. Standard stuff.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:27 AM  5 years agoPost 18
Metalizer

rrApprentice

Canton, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

so obummer get a automatic win
It does look that way.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:43 AM  5 years agoPost 19
Metalizer

rrApprentice

Canton, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Sorry Dragon. You assumptions are dead wrong. There is absolutely
no reason that an American (or foreigner) should not recieve do process. Very Dangerous and UNAmerican Period...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2011 01:46 AM  5 years agoPost 20
es1co2bar3

rrKey Veteran

winnetka california

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

so obummer get a automatic win
It does look that way.
ooOOPS there it's it no other way bro,

The republican line up is suck. only reason why no republican see this, because all of them hate anything that call democrat.

I was waiting on some honey but there aren't no Queen bee,

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 1412 views
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterOff Topics News & Politics › Ron Paul: Defense Bill Establishes Martial Law In​America
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 8  Topic Subscribe

Sunday, November 19 - 3:45 pm - Copyright © 2000-2017 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online