National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2012 has a nice gem in it

This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only".

In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3

National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2012 has a nice gem in it
Topic Started: Dec 4 2011, 06:09 PM (626 Views)
Ulgania	Dec 4 2011, 06:09 PM Post #1
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse Posts: 4,041 Group: Members Member #450 Joined: June 3, 2008	the Senate voted to simultaneously shred the centuries-old Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents the use of American soldiers to enforce domestic laws, and habeas corpus, our fundamental right to challenge our detention by the government. Essentially, the US is now part of the "battlefield", and gives the military the power to legally detain, assassinate, and torture US citizens without a right to trial. There was a brief fight to get rid of that provision, but it never came to fruition and the whole bill effectively passed 93-7. With the expectation of it passing strongly in the House, Obama's veto warning may go to shit. So. The best part of this so far is I haven't seen much news about it; the media isn't exactly rearing up to report on this measure. King George would be proud. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury



Kasnyia	Dec 4 2011, 07:03 PM Post #2
Chairman of the Bank Posts: 12,339 Group: Veterans Member #164 Joined: July 15, 2005	I don't normally venture to this section of the forum, but Jeez...



Union	Dec 4 2011, 07:05 PM Post #3
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	Sensationalism is getting really boring. Edited by Union, Dec 4 2011, 07:11 PM.



Ulgania	Dec 4 2011, 07:39 PM Post #4
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse Posts: 4,041 Group: Members Member #450 Joined: June 3, 2008	Ha, yeah. I was caught up in it all. I blame having libertarian roommates.



Union	Dec 4 2011, 10:12 PM Post #5
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	Tell them the NAP can only be compared to the labor theory of value in terms of quackiness.



The Authority of the Grand Moff	Dec 4 2011, 10:20 PM Post #6
2nd Lieutenant Posts: 460 Group: Members Member #657 Joined: February 11, 2011	WORKERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!



meh	Dec 5 2011, 03:56 AM Post #7
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Union Dec 4 2011, 07:05 PM Sensationalism is getting really boring. How so?



Union	Dec 5 2011, 12:56 PM Post #8
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	What do you mean how so? How is the NDAA2012 being sensationalized? How things are being sensationalized in general?



New Harumf	Dec 5 2011, 02:04 PM Post #9
Bloodthirsty Unicorn Posts: 9,638 Group: Forum Mods Member #177 Joined: October 8, 2005	This is the first step on the road to a dictatorship. Who decides who is an enemy of the state? What next, political enemies? This is a bad, bad thing.



Sedulius	Dec 5 2011, 09:29 PM Post #10
Field Marshal Posts: 4,727 Group: Members Member #427 Joined: March 29, 2008	One more step to the fall. I keep telling you guys the US is not the place to stay. This is another shred of evidence in my favor.



meh	Dec 6 2011, 02:00 AM Post #11
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Union Dec 5 2011, 12:56 PM What do you mean how so? How is the NDAA2012 being sensationalized? How things are being sensationalized in general? Your second question.



Union	Dec 6 2011, 02:28 AM Post #12
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	UC Davis spray videos being edited to not show the fifteen minutes of students encircling the officer and not allowing him to leave. Crying about SOPA or NDAA2012 as if it had any chance of not getting vetoed and then overturned. A lot of crying going on about the big bad evil guvment as if it were some oppressive alien boot robbing us all of the chance to be singing kumbaya in nice houses doing finger waves. It's seriously like the entire [Internet/Reddit using] country became some strange hybrid of LaRouche and Ron Paul, with plenty of bullshit hippy thrown in the mix. Edited by Union, Dec 6 2011, 02:29 AM.



meh	Dec 6 2011, 04:45 AM Post #13
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Union Dec 6 2011, 02:28 AM UC Davis spray videos being edited to not show the fifteen minutes of students encircling the officer and not allowing him to leave. Crying about SOPA or NDAA2012 as if it had any chance of not getting vetoed and then overturned. A lot of crying going on about the big bad evil guvment as if it were some oppressive alien boot robbing us all of the chance to be singing kumbaya in nice houses doing finger waves. It's seriously like the entire [Internet/Reddit using] country became some strange hybrid of LaRouche and Ron Paul, with plenty of bullshit hippy thrown in the mix. That was your third question. How is NDAA2012 being sensationalized?



Union	Dec 6 2011, 02:19 PM Post #14
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	Let's assume it passes the House, and the President's veto gets overriden (much more difficult than it sounds, because House members will have to justify it to the public). So what? There ARE specific provisions which mandate when it can be used. They won't be arresting OWS kids at night in their beds and sending them to Guantanamo. The United States is not a tyranny. Fuck, consider the Patriot Act - it has been used a handful of times wrongly, and in each case the government apologized and paid compensation! This isn't North Korea, FFS. Laws do not prevent abuse. If Obama wanted to arrest OWS kids and send to labor camps in Alaska, he could do it. At that point, a piece of paper won't prevent it. Extrajudicial killings are illegal in every country in the world - doesn't stop Kim Jong Il. Doesn't stop Mugabe. Didn't stop Pinochet or Galtieri. It is irrelevant. These laws do not prevent evil - they hamper justice. Of course, you can disagree. That doesn't mean one is being any less sensationalist. It is a jump from "FEMA is constructing camps in the countryside to harbor refugee populations" to "These camps will harbor political dissidents in a massive dictorial crackdown by our elected leaders." If an American citizen is planning an attack on the United States, and has met the criteria for evidence within the goddamn law itself, then I'm perfectly OK with detaining them immediately. But this isn't a police state, and this law isn't going to make for a police state. They're not going to arrest you at night. You won't wake up one evening with a hood on your head being carted out the door and shunted into a van because you happened to reside at Zalcotti Park for a few weeks last month. :rolleyes:



New Harumf	Dec 6 2011, 05:52 PM Post #15
Bloodthirsty Unicorn Posts: 9,638 Group: Forum Mods Member #177 Joined: October 8, 2005	Union Dec 6 2011, 02:19 PM Let's assume it passes the House, and the President's veto gets overriden (much more difficult than it sounds, because House members will have to justify it to the public). So what? There ARE specific provisions which mandate when it can be used. They won't be arresting OWS kids at night in their beds and sending them to Guantanamo. The United States is not a tyranny. Fuck, consider the Patriot Act - it has been used a handful of times wrongly, and in each case the government apologized and paid compensation! This isn't North Korea, FFS. Laws do not prevent abuse. If Obama wanted to arrest OWS kids and send to labor camps in Alaska, he could do it. At that point, a piece of paper won't prevent it. Extrajudicial killings are illegal in every country in the world - doesn't stop Kim Jong Il. Doesn't stop Mugabe. Didn't stop Pinochet or Galtieri. It is irrelevant. These laws do not prevent evil - they hamper justice. Of course, you can disagree. That doesn't mean one is being any less sensationalist. It is a jump from "FEMA is constructing camps in the countryside to harbor refugee populations" to "These camps will harbor political dissidents in a massive dictorial crackdown by our elected leaders." If an American citizen is planning an attack on the United States, and has met the criteria for evidence within the goddamn law itself, then I'm perfectly OK with detaining them immediately. But this isn't a police state, and this law isn't going to make for a police state. They're not going to arrest you at night. You won't wake up one evening with a hood on your head being carted out the door and shunted into a van because you happened to reside at Zalcotti Park for a few weeks last month. :rolleyes: Not yet, at least. But if this becomes a new part of the fabric of our collective memory, then what will we allow? We have a constitution for a reason, by God, and our elected officials are sworn to uphold it. That is all. :furious:



Union	Dec 6 2011, 07:10 PM Post #16
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	And I was in favor of the Udall Amendment for that reason. It is not yet a law, however, and has not even made it halfway there. This is what I mean by sensationalizing.



meh	Dec 6 2011, 07:47 PM Post #17
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Union Dec 6 2011, 07:10 PM And I was in favor of the Udall Amendment for that reason. It is not yet a law, however, and has not even made it halfway there. This is what I mean by sensationalizing. I can understand your problem with sensationalism, but the fact the simple fact that this could become law is disturbing.



Union	Dec 6 2011, 08:52 PM Post #18
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	Why? Because it conflicts with your ideology, or because its potentially unconstitutional clauses?



Sedulius	Dec 7 2011, 12:15 AM Post #19
Field Marshal Posts: 4,727 Group: Members Member #427 Joined: March 29, 2008	New Harumf Dec 6 2011, 05:52 PM Not yet, at least. But if this becomes a new part of the fabric of our collective memory, then what will we allow? We have a constitution for a reason, by God, and our elected officials are sworn to uphold it. That is all. :furious: Damn right. NH, you are hat. People need to get it through their thick fucking skulls that the US is going down the wrong path. Things will not turn out well by heading down that path.



meh	Dec 7 2011, 12:57 AM Post #20
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Union Dec 6 2011, 08:52 PM Why? Because it conflicts with your ideology, or because its potentially unconstitutional clauses? The latter more than the former.



Aelius	Dec 7 2011, 08:26 AM Post #21
Norman Warlord Posts: 2,137 Group: Members Member #523 Joined: July 17, 2009	meh Dec 7 2011, 12:57 AM Union Dec 6 2011, 08:52 PM Why? Because it conflicts with your ideology, or because its potentially unconstitutional clauses? The latter more than the former. I'm more concerned about the unconstitutional aspects myself. The law itself may be meant to intentionally stop actual terrorists, but if the wrong people get into power and get desperate, what's to stop them from deciding ordinary Americans who nonviolently disagree with them are terrorists?



Union	Dec 7 2011, 09:18 AM Post #22
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	... Don't vote for the wrong people, and if you have that little faith in your fellow citizen, then a constitutional republic ain't for you no matter how you slice it. How arrogant do you have to be to think this way...? In any case, if the wrong people get into office, whether a law exists or not won't matter. :rolleyes: There were laws against German rearmament and that didn't fucking matter, did it? What exactly is the reasoning here? "I want to arrest normal American citizens indiscriminately and put them into military detention camps while suspending their fundamental liberties, but gosh darn it, there is no law letting me do that. I guess I'll work on EPA regulations instead!" Edited by Union, Dec 7 2011, 09:23 AM.



Sedulius	Dec 7 2011, 10:28 AM Post #23
Field Marshal Posts: 4,727 Group: Members Member #427 Joined: March 29, 2008	Union Dec 7 2011, 09:18 AM ... Don't vote for the wrong people, and if you have that little faith in your fellow citizen, then a constitutional republic ain't for you no matter how you slice it. How arrogant do you have to be to think this way...? You're a douche, Union.



Union	Dec 7 2011, 10:50 AM Post #24
Pyrenees Republic Posts: 3,219 Group: Forum Mods Member #307 Joined: December 27, 2006	I call it like I see it. But hey, I'll bite: Why am I a douche, Sed? Edited by Union, Dec 7 2011, 02:06 PM.



meh	Dec 7 2011, 03:47 PM Post #25
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Union Dec 7 2011, 09:18 AM ... Don't vote for the wrong people, and if you have that little faith in your fellow citizen, then a constitutional republic ain't for you no matter how you slice it. How arrogant do you have to be to think this way...? In any case, if the wrong people get into office, whether a law exists or not won't matter. :rolleyes: There were laws against German rearmament and that didn't fucking matter, did it? What exactly is the reasoning here? "I want to arrest normal American citizens indiscriminately and put them into military detention camps while suspending their fundamental liberties, but gosh darn it, there is no law letting me do that. I guess I'll work on EPA regulations instead!" This is not a reasonable justification to allow such a law to pass. And I agree with Sed, you have been overly aggressive lately.

Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3