Senate To Vote On Legislation That Allows U.S. Military to Detain Americans

**verus rex** · 11-26-2011, 12:52 PM

Senate To Vote On Legislation That Allows U.S. Military to Detain Americans Without Charge or Trial

Remember that debate between Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich, where Mr. Gingrich suggested we should expand and strengthen the Patriot Act in the name of protecting US citizens from terrorists? Mr. Gingrich indicated that there exists a line between criminal law and the war on terror, and that we need not worry the government will overstep its bounds.

While Americans enjoy the Thanksgiving weekend and join the annual running of the bulls celebration at malls and retail outlets, something sinister is taking place in Congress - and it should scare the hell out of you. If the President and Senate have their way, your front lawn will soon become a battlefield, and you'll be subjected to military, not criminal, law.

From the ACLU Via The Daily Sheeple:

The Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield - even people in the United States itself.

...

The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president - and every future president - the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night's Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.

The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn't anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?

This is happening right now - IN AMERICA! A law that is designed to specifically bypass Constitutional protections and one that will undoubtedly be used against the American people to further advance and expand the national police state.

Once signed into law the President (or anyone of his minions within the Justice Department or Homeland Security acting on his behalf) can issue orders to arrest, detain and imprison an American citizen in the United States without due process. Since most terror arrests fall into the realm of national security, and therefore are secret, no evidence would ever need to be presented for the permanent detainment (and who knows what else) of an American imprisoned under this law.

Senate To Vote On Legislation That Allows U.S. Military to Detain Americans Without Charge or Trial

Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens in a

**KellyD** · 11-26-2011, 01:21 PM

its just a matter of time in my opinion.

**nivek** · 11-26-2011, 02:30 PM

Fear mongering crap, fact check things instead of being sheeple yourselves...

This sums it up nice...

Originally Posted by unknown55

So I've been seeing a lot of different websites claiming what is said in the title of this thread: Bill will allow use of military force against U.S citizens and incorporate the homeland as part of the "battlefield." So after seeing this on a number of sites and reading (skimming really) the bill for myself, I thought, especially since I haven't seen any mention of it here on AU (so proud of you all for that btw

), that I would go ahead and straighten it out beforehand.

The claim basically comes from Alex Jones and company and they get it from the ACLU blog - this is what everyone keeps linking to. Of course instead of reading for themselves they rely on these people to spoon feed them material and parrot it wherever they can without checking facts

. Fact of the matter is that the bill specifically exempts U.S citizens from what the bill entails with regards to Military detainees. Here's the legislation, specifically sections 1031 and 1032:

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.

So as one can see, section 1032b subsection 2 explicitly states "The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States." There you have it plain as day and it just goes to show that we shouldn't let other people do our reading and analysis for us

.

Here's the link to the entire bill for those interested:
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Oh and P.S: Happy belated Thanksgiving to my fellow citizens! I'm still stuffed from all that turkey, pie, and cobbler

**unknown55** · 11-26-2011, 02:38 PM

Yeah I saw this too rex...unfortunately (or fortunately really) it's just some more fear mongering. Here's the thread I put up for it the other day, to which niv has quoted me on:
S.1867 - Bill to Allow Use of Military Force Against U.S Citizens

As per the Patriot Act and expanding on it, I say to hell with that! Everyone by now probably knows this quote but repetition is learning I've always been told:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin

**verus rex** · 11-26-2011, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by unknown55

Yeah I saw this too rex...unfortunately (or fortunately really) it's just some more fear mongering. Here's the thread I put up for it the other day, to which niv has quoted me on:
S.1867 - Bill to Allow Use of Military Force Against U.S Citizens

As per the Patriot Act and expanding on it, I say to hell with that! Everyone by now probably knows this quote but repetition is learning I've always been told:

oh i didn't know you made a thread on this already unknown i just came across this today and i agree with you about the Patriot Act and the Ben Frank quote.