Go Back Natural Medicine Talk > Off-topic > Chitchat

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
� #1
Old 12-18-2011, 10:51 AM
Arrowwind09's Avatar
Standing at the Portal
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,563
Arrowwind09 will become famous soon enoughArrowwind09 will become famous soon enough
Default New Bill Damages Bill of Rights

I found this Opinion in my local newspaper today, the Arco Advertiser, Dec. !5, 2011 and thought it was worth typing out and sending out. This article will give you some insight to the nature of a couple of senators also.
.................................................. ..........

Could Target Americans for Military Detentilon
by Dr. Harold Pease

Civil libertarians and constitutional buffs are angrier witht he Federal Governemnt now than at any time since the Bush Patriot Act was pushed onto the American People ten years ago. Buried deep within the over 600 pages, $662 billion National Defense Authorization Act is language that "would require the military to hold suspected terrorists linked to Al Qaeda or its affiliates, even those captured on U.S. soil indifinitely" and without trial on the say so of the miliarty though the President alone. Moreover, even Americans could be removed to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, against their will and deprived fo their constitutional rights.
The fury has to do with U.S. citizenship. Origianlly Senators Carl Levin and John McCain, who sponsored the bill, did not exempt U.S. citizens - a serious omission which dumps sizable portions of Amendemnts 4, 5, and 6 of the Bill of Rights. Senators Paul, Dianne Feinstein and others demanding a citizen exclusion proposed amendments to do so, all of which were rejected. Senator Fienstein noted that her goal "was to assure the military won't be roaming our streets looking for suspected terrorists." The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, following the Civil War forbade the U.S. miliary from performing law enforcement functions of American soil. The American Cilil Liberties Union was also blunt. "Since the bill puts miliarty detention authority on steroids and makes it permanent, Amercian citizens and others are at greater risk of being locked away by the militarty without charge or trial if this bill becomes law." When asked if it were possible for an American to be shipped to Guantanamo Bay, John McCain, a co-author of the bill, said yes. Senator Lindsey Long was more blunt. "When they say 'I want my lawyer,' you tell them. 'Shut up. You don't get a lawyer."

Finally, Dianne Feinstein successfully got Senate colleagues to accept a weakened version of the same thing, "nothing in the bill changes current law relating to the detention of U.S. citizens and legal aliens." Even while getting this clarification Senator Levin was still arguing, "that the June 2004 Supreme Court decsision n Hamdi v. Runsfeld said U.S. citizens can be detained indifinitely." So, since it was so difficult to get an exclusion, for American, and the co-autohors of the bill, Senators Levin and McCain, say that it does include U.S. citizens as well. Why would a weak exclusion give civil libertarians any comfort? It doesn't.

Some things are very clear. The terms "terrorists" and "affiliates" are not adequately defined, the President is given way to much power, and it violates the U.S. Constitution upon which everyone voting has sworn to uphold. It is hard to trust the government's precise definititon of terrorists when Vice President Joe Biden, a few weeks ago referred to Tea Partiers as terrorists and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a few months prior to this referred to them as mobsters, (a term also implying a threat to society). What guarantee to we have that the "new" enemy does not simply rotate to anyone defined as "anti-government," citizen or not?

The measure places to much power and trust in the office of the President which has not proved particularly trustworthy in the past with respect to the Constitutional and civil libery. Franklin D Roosevelt, with the storke of a pen, detained thousands of Japanese Americans in "relocation camps" in World War II on the basis of race and potential terrorism alone. Jose Padilla, allegedly an affiliate of al Qaeda, a U.S. citizen arrested in Chicago for having plans to "detonate a dirty bomb," was tortured and confinded, without benefit of a lawyer for three years, by then President George W. Bush; all this within the borders of the United States. No acutal evidence of a d "dirty bomb" wa ever produced, nor was Padilla ever charged with a crime. Two other Americans, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel, had similar torture experiences as did Padilla but with less time in solitary confinement, again without chares. (see details in the December 5 issue of the New American). Ulitmatley, with no evidence to support their confinement, they were set free.

And if Americans are sent to Guananamo Bay under this law, how much confidence can we have that if found innocent they would be set free, especially given President Barrack Obama's recent assertion, cited in the above referenc, that were miliatary commission to find them innocent they still "wound never be set free from prison." This is so wrong. Why should we have confidnece in any president to not use this power as seemeth him good?
The threat of potential incarceration without recourse to a lawer, judege and trial is very serious. The miliatary performing police duties here to for rednederd by civil authorities is unconscionable in a free society. Only seven understood the Constitution well enough to vote no. Should President Obama sign this bill into law, I will follow with a column on how it emasculates Amendments 4, 5, and 6 of the Bill of Right. Until then pass this column alon gto others. It is your liberty at stake.

Dr Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writtings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years, at Taft College. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit


Need I remind you that the relocation camps are already built on American soil and waiting for their guests... Arrow
Reply With Quote
� #2
Old 12-18-2011, 11:06 AM
jfh jfh is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 3,982
Blog Entries: 16
jfh has a spectacular aura aboutjfh has a spectacular aura about

Isn't it funny how so many people despise the American Civil Liberties Union? Especially all conservatives.

As I write this, the Defense Authorization bill is on its way to President Obama's desk. The bill contains dangerous, sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provisions.

Leading members of Congress have already indicated that they believe that these provisions could be used by this and any future president to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial � even American citizens and others picked up within the borders of the United States.

According to reports, the President's advisors are recommending that he not veto this legislation despite earlier promises to do so. We need to tell the President to listen to the American people.

There are moments in America when our freedoms depend on the willingness of a President to act firmly and decisively to sustain our fundamental values; moments that decide the course our nation takes for years to come.

This is one of those moments. Tell President Obama you�re counting on him to veto indefinite detention and uphold the freedoms and values America was built on.

- Jim

Love is a serious mental disease. -Plato
Reply With Quote
� #3
Old 12-18-2011, 11:15 AM
Arrowwind09's Avatar
Standing at the Portal
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,563
Arrowwind09 will become famous soon enoughArrowwind09 will become famous soon enough

Yes, some conservatives are very distraught by ACLU, beings that they challenge the dirty deeds and make people confront illegal acts within our own nation. If the ACLU wins generally it is because they have proven that what ever the greivience is it is all tied up in constitutional justice and someone is caught inflicting illegal acts on THE PEOPLE and if those illegal acts when recitifed affect the bottom lines in profits, many conservatives don't like it.
Reply With Quote
� #4
Old 12-18-2011, 05:46 PM
Mad Scientest's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,017
Mad Scientest has a spectacular aura aboutMad Scientest has a spectacular aura about

Originally Posted by Arrowwind09 View Post
Need I remind you that the relocation camps are already built on American soil and waiting for their guests... Arrow
Not only that but they are now started to actively look for people to hire to man them. It is beginning to look like these camps that we were told didn't exist are now being prepared to except guests.

The other day I sent of a letter to my local newspaper on this subject. I have had a good track record of having my letters published in the past but they may consider this one a little too controversial.

Congress recently passed a new defense authorizing bill and one of the unique extra items that was snuck into it was a provision that virtually destroys our constitutional protection. While it is said to be an anti-terrorist law in reality it can be applied to anyone. All that is required is for government to �claim� someone has committed a belligerent act and thus they�re a terrorist. At that point no evidence is needed, no appeals can be made, legal representation maybe denied and they can be indefinitely detained. These individuals are effectively dropped into a black hole as if they never existed.

Somehow I don�t believe that this is what the founders of the constitution had in mind, and if that is not bad enough what about these presidential executive orders just waiting the correct crises to be signed in to law.

#10995 allows for the take over of the news media. (No 1st. amendment)
#10997 & #10998 allows the takeover of all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals and all means of transportation, including personal cars, and total control over all highways, seaports, and waterways.
#10999 allows the take over of all food resources and farms.
#11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision. (Slave labor)
#11001 & 11004 allows taking over all health, education and welfare functions and the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations. (All individual choice is removed)
#11921 allows the FEMA to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. (The constitution is now null and void)

Unfortunately there are many more like these so those who like the idea of a big government coming to take care of them, well here it is, welcome to your brave new world and a total police state.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OMG! California Bill 499! Wake UP!!!! Arrowwind09 General Discussions 7 09-23-2011 04:00 AM
No Healthcare Bill in '09? EarlyBird Health Insurance 36 03-30-2010 02:28 PM
First All-Summer Cooling Bill? EarlyBird Chitchat 17 04-11-2008 09:30 PM
Another bad bill in senate just me Chitchat 4 01-19-2007 07:43 AM
Protest this bill today!!! 12/09/06 Marcus Health Insurance 0 12-09-2006 10:39 AM