Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10023-senate-passes-controversial-defense-bill

read it and weep. Say hello to our new police state if Obama doesn't veto the crap out of this. But considering how much support it has in the senate and house, it could still be passed despite that.

It can't be passed if the Supreme Court gets a hold of it though. Besides, this is kind of why we're allowed to bear arms.

The New American is the publication of the John Birch Society. I know the JBS from my older friends, that are either Libertarians or Republicans, talking about how right wing and crazy they are.

Ahtman wrote:The New American is the publication of the John Birch Society. I know the JBS from my older friends, that are either Libertarians or Republicans, talking about how right wing and crazy they are.

They link to firedoglake, which is completely on the other side of the political spectrum.

If you're looking for crazy, that's a good place to start.

I'm unsure whether this is loonies on both sides raising a stink or if it is a legitimate concern. I'm not sure I care enough to find out.

halonachos wrote:It can't be passed if the Supreme Court gets a hold of it though. Besides, this is kind of why we're allowed to bear arms.

Finally, years of ridicule for our weapon hoarding ways...vindicated!

And YOU thought my underground bunker system, water wheel, and natural filtration system were CRAZY.

Alex Jones right again!

I stopped at Ron Paul and the statement that the economic collapse was intentional.

I'm unsure whether this is loonies on both sides raising a stink or if it is a legitimate concern. I'm not sure I care enough to find out.

If it's not a hippy it can't impugn your freedoms!

AustonT wrote:And YOU thought my underground bunker system, water wheel, and natural filtration system were CRAZY.

I know right!

I've been drinking my own recycled urine for years, ever since I found out they put fluorine in water... can't have my precious bodily fluids contaminated.

No offense but the National Defense Authorization Act has been passed every year for almost fifty years now. I'd have to read what exactly makes this one different from the previous versions to really make any decision on this.

It's a website run by crazy people, linking to another website run by crazy people, over a bill I hadn't heard of before. I'm not saying there's nothing to worry about, but I'd really advise getting information from non-crazy people before panicking.

Melissia wrote:No offense but the National Defense Authorization Act has been passed every year for almost fifty years now. I'd have to read what exactly makes this one different from the previous versions to really make any decision on this.

There are provisions for holding American citizens indefinitely without trial in it. They are shaky, sparsely worded, and exactly the kind of thing that would see dissidents thrown in gitmo without a peep legally. It was penned in response to the Anwar Awlaki thing.

Melissia wrote:No offense but the National Defense Authorization Act has been passed every year for almost fifty years now. I'd have to read what exactly makes this one different from the previous versions to really make any decision on this.

Its related to giving the military power power to deal with detainees and to order executions (which could include US citizens such as the one we airstrike with a drone). I think that's what its about anyway. I'm certain its people having another silly kneejerk reaction about 'oh this bill allows the government to do this' with no sensible explanation for why the government would want to do it in the first place.

The above statement may or may not come to bite me in the buns

LordofHats wrote:

Melissia wrote:No offense but the National Defense Authorization Act has been passed every year for almost fifty years now. I'd have to read what exactly makes this one different from the previous versions to really make any decision on this.

Its related to giving the military power power to deal with detainees and to order executions (which could include US citizens such as the one we airstrike with a drone). I think that's what its about anyway. I'm certain its people having another silly kneejerk reaction about 'oh this bill allows the government to do this' with no sensible explanation for why the government would want to do it in the first place.

The above statement may or may not come to bite me in the buns

Scroll up.

Melissia wrote:No offense but the National Defense Authorization Act has been passed every year for almost fifty years now. I'd have to read what exactly makes this one different from the previous versions to really make any decision on this.

If what that article is reporting is correct they are dismantling Posse Comitatus.

Called it

Ah, here we go.

From the wikipedia article:

As currently written, the NDAA text affirms the authority to detain "a person who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces" under "the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities," and authorizes "transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity."

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf

Goddamned extraordinary rendition. The "end of hostilities" my ass, that's NEVER going to happen.

Melissia wrote:Ah, here we go.

From the wikipedia article:

As currently written, the NDAA text affirms the authority to detain "a person who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces" under "the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities," and authorizes "transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity."

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf

Goddamned extraordinary rendition. The "end of hostilities" my ass, that's NEVER going to happen.

It's just like Orwell predicted, they have to keep us scared of some boogeyman or another, so that they can slowly grind us down. That's why FEMA ordered all those plastic coffins that can fit three people each.

It's a race to see if WW3 or a Civil War happens first.....GO!

warpcrafter wrote:

Alex Jones right again!

Don't get your news from Alex Jones.

Dibs on the water cannon. Bear in mind though the military falls under UCMJ and Laws of War. So lawful orders and unlawful orders do apply.

I can't see this holding up if the Supreme Court gets a hold of it. Much like the SOPA I just can't get that worked up over something that will get blown out of the water the first time it gets challenged.

Melissia wrote:Goddamned extraordinary rendition. The "end of hostilities" my ass, that's NEVER going to happen.

At least not so long as we're at war with a noun.

Jihadin wrote:Dibs on the water cannon.

But I wanted the water gun! You always get it! I'm telling mom.

It's just like Orwell predicted, they have to keep us scared of some boogeyman or another, so that they can slowly grind us down. That's why FEMA ordered all those plastic coffins that can fit three people each.

Plus it´s on Alex Jones so it just haaaaas to be true

Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.(Emphasis added)

just throwing it out there

Did that crazy radio man just claim that the USA is becomming like Nazi Germany?

Jihadin wrote:Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.(Emphasis added)

just throwing it out there

And the dudes that got captured and shipped to Egypt to be tortured?

ShumaGorath wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.(Emphasis added)

just throwing it out there

And the dudes that got captured and shipped to Egypt to be tortured?

Free vacation?

Don't worry lads, you can all move in with me, I live in Yorkshire where it is civilised and in my local it's 1.26 a pint.

I mean, that right there is reason enough to move. And I would live in any town on earth that had a sub pound pint.

Even if Hitler was resurrected and made the mayor, and the local police carried big spiky dildo's which they raped you with instead of issuing speeding tickets.

mattyrm wrote: Don't worry lads, you can all move in with me, I live in Yorkshire where it is civilised and in my local it's 1.26 a pint.

I mean, that right there is reason enough to move. And I would live in any town on earth that had a sub pound pint.

Even if Hitler was resurrected and made the mayor, and the local police carried big spiky dildo's which they raped you with instead of issuing speeding tickets.

I don't agree with you on much but i agree with you on that...
Though hopefully without Mayor Hitler and spikey dildo traffic poice...
That would be somehwat less than fun.