Petition to IMPEACH ALL Senators who Voted for U.S. is a Ba | Page 3 | General Discussion Topics | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Petition to IMPEACH ALL Senators who Voted for U.S. is a Ba
February 1, 2012
1:54 am
Avatar
katsung47
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 844
Member Since:
February 23, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"Wing-Zero" wrote: Yes, I saw the previous post.

but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1031 of the bill).

Once again, I reiterate - COVERED PERSONS. You can take a gander at SEC. 1031. and see for yourself that it states numerously that the things in the bill only apply to covered persons (and also points to sub-section b in SEC. 1032. to tell you who does OR DOESN'T fall under "Covered Persons".)

The evidence isn't there that it allows for indefinite detention of American citizens. Even if it did, numerous Supreme Court cases AND the 6th Amendment would be shoved in there so damn quick it would probably be considered an NC-17 rating.

Though you try to cheat people, Obama knew better what he signed. Tell me what he said that "his administration won't use that law" means?

Obama sued over indefinite detention and torture of Americans act
17 January, 2012, 02:28

US President Barack Obama is the target of a suit filed by Pulitzer Prize-winner Hedges, and the reasoning seems more than obvious to him. The decision to take the commander-in-chief to court comes as a response to President Obama’s December 31 signing of the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, a legislation that allows the US military to detain American citizens indefinitely at off-site torture prisons like Guantanamo Bay.

Obama amended the NDAA with a signing statement on New Year's Eve, insisting that while the Act does indeed give him the power to detain his own citizens indefinitely without charge, that doesn’t mean he will do so. Specifically, Obama wrote that his administration “will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens.” Under another piece of legislation, however, the government is being granted the right to suspend citizenship of any American if the Enemy Expatriation Act joins the ranks of the NDAA as an atrocious act approved by the president.

http://rt.com/usa/news/obama-h.....-sued-933/

February 1, 2012
2:46 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Several congressmen that supported this bill are under the impression that it does indeed include U.S. citizens, have said that was their intention and they wished the bill went further. It's all there on CSPAN and linked on youtube for all to see. Maybe I could sort through my web history and pull up such a video I watched just last night.

February 1, 2012
4:01 am
Avatar
Wing-Zero
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3278
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"katsung47" wrote: Though you try to cheat people, Obama knew better what he signed. Tell me what he said that "his administration won't use that law" means?

Cute, another ad hominem, but you have no proof nor evidence that the bill allows for what you say it allows.

"Rykuss" wrote: Several congressmen that supported this bill are under the impression that it does indeed include U.S. citizens, have said that was their intention and they wished the bill went further. It's all there on CSPAN and linked on youtube for all to see. Maybe I could sort through my web history and pull up such a video I watched just last night.

I'd like to see that video. I'm also fully aware that Congressfolk would have no problem putting the actual writing into a bill and signing our lives away.

War is an extension of economics and diplomacy through other means.

Economics and diplomacy are methods of securing resources used by humans.

Securing resources is the one necessary behavior for all living things.

War = Life

February 1, 2012
2:52 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

I'm still digging through my history, I watch and visit a lot of places! 😯 Let me know what you think of this one. Anyone can host these and give them whatever title they like, I look past that and judge the contents within. My apologies, I had to run out the door shortly after posting this morning. Anyway, this one is an eye opener because they are discussing not only the NDAA but intelligence gathering. I think this was a discussion about Homeland Security in general.

These are some of the people responsible for such bills and it's eye opening just to hear them speak.

February 14, 2012
1:44 am
Avatar
katsung47
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 844
Member Since:
February 23, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"Wing-Zero" wrote: [quote="katsung47"]Though you try to cheat people, Obama knew better what he signed. Tell me what he said that "his administration won't use that law" means?

Cute, another ad hominem, but you have no proof nor evidence that the bill allows for what you say it allows.

.

Myth busted: Yes, the NDAA does apply to Americans, and here's the text that says so
Sunday, January 01, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
First off, the offending section of the bill that used to be called 1031 was moved to 1021. Here is the title:

(http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-...)

SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

The two relevant sections to consider are titled and stated as follows;

(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.

By PARSING the language here, we must split it into two sentences based on the "or" operator. This statement essentially means:

• Nothing in this section is intended to LIMIT the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

• Nothing in this section is intended to EXPAND the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

In other words, this section places no limits whatsoever of the "authority of the President" to use military force (against American citizens). Keep that in mind as you read the next section:

http://www.naturalnews.com/034538_NDAA_ ... z1kQnEAmHC

February 15, 2012
7:18 am
Avatar
Wing-Zero
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3278
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

You might wanna fix that 404 gpo.gov link, champ.

Edit: Check SEC. 1022., buddy. It says the exact same thing.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112h ... 540enr.pdf

(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.

Next, please.

War is an extension of economics and diplomacy through other means.

Economics and diplomacy are methods of securing resources used by humans.

Securing resources is the one necessary behavior for all living things.

War = Life

February 18, 2012
10:12 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

"Wing-Zero" wrote: You might wanna fix that 404 gpo.gov link, champ.

Edit: Check SEC. 1022., buddy. It says the exact same thing.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112h ... 540enr.pdf

(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.

Next, please.

I think the petition should be to impeach all Senators with "scary views" about US citizens. Laugh C-SPAN has all the evidence we need. When these people speak, I can't help but facepalm. Laugh

February 18, 2012
10:17 pm
Avatar
Wing-Zero
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3278
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"Rykuss" wrote: I think the petition should be to impeach all Senators with "scary views" about US citizens.

I'd sign that petition exactly one billion times.

War is an extension of economics and diplomacy through other means.

Economics and diplomacy are methods of securing resources used by humans.

Securing resources is the one necessary behavior for all living things.

War = Life

February 20, 2012
6:55 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

"Wing-Zero" wrote: [quote="Rykuss"]I think the petition should be to impeach all Senators with "scary views" about US citizens.

I'd sign that petition exactly one billion times.

Talk about a major hand cramp. 😯

February 26, 2012
10:41 pm
Avatar
katsung47
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 844
Member Since:
February 23, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Ron Paul Demands Repeal of NDAA in Post-Primary Speech

Posted by clnews Thursday, February 2nd, 2012

http://consciouslifenews.com/ron-paul-d ... h/1124191/

No permission to create posts
Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 288

Currently Online: John Greenewald
42 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

greeney2: 10262

bionic: 9870

Lashmar: 5289

tigger: 4576

rath: 4297

DIss0n80r: 4161

sandra: 3858

frrostedman: 3815

Wing-Zero: 3278

Tairaa: 2842

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 24448

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 8

Forums: 31

Topics: 8816

Posts: 123798

Newest Members:

ieltsproxy23, Bobbi, QuietLiistener, Kemmer, Dee, ielts abono, Viviane Trevithick, Snow, Warren

Administrators: John Greenewald: 617, blackvault: 1776