1031 Indefinite Detainment Bill gives the US Government the right to hold U.S. Citizens without rights to a trial or lawyer, forever.
President Obama has threatened to veto the bill, arguing that the indefinite military detention section is an attempt by the Senate to “micromanage” the work of the Defense Department. Senators opposing the dentition provision appear to have enough votes to reject an override attempt of a veto. Earlier in the week, the Senate rejected an amendment by Sen. Mark Udall [D, CO] to strip the detention language from the bill, but the amendment did secure more than the 34 votes (2/3rds majority) that would be needed to sustain a veto. The full roll call on that amendment can be viewed here.
Ayes: 37 (Democrat: 34; Republican: 2; Other: 1)
Nays: 61 (Democrat: 16; Republican: 44; Other: 1)
If Democrats are traditionally Liberal, then what has happened to the so-called Liberal philosophy? I grew up with the understanding that Liberals supported basic human rights, were anti-war, etc. I was a believer. What changed?
Is it really the fear of Terrorists that drives this?
Yes.
This is how the terrorists have managed to win the war on terrorism. They have us where they want us.
The fear and trembling begins with the House and Senate and trickles down to the man on the street.
They have us spending trillions of dollars on security while we are chasing ghosts.
What a pity. There was a better United States at one time.
Traditionally liberals would have supported something like this. FDR had no problems. Truman, JFK, LBJ no problems.
By the way, any mea culpas from this site for putting up the ACLU talking points that the White House is threatening a veto?
McCullough wrote, “I grew up with the understanding that Liberals supported basic human rights, were anti-war, etc. What changed?”. Ideology and political ethos went the way of the dodo after the cold war. Pretty much everywhere in the world, at the same time. Best to assume that all leaders are morally ambivalent, until proven otherwise. Thanks for the post.
veto or be completely un-american.
This is the Real reason for the veto. You are damned if this goes through and damned if it doesn’t:
http://warisacrime.org/content/obama-wants-veto-indefinite-detention-bill-because-it-would-hold-us-geneva-convention
“The bill puts military detention authority on steroids and makes it permanent, American citizens and others are at greater risk of being locked away by the military without charge or trial,” said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.
As Spencer Ackerman highlights, the bill completely violates the sixth amendment in that it allows American citizens to be locked up indefinitely, including in a foreign detention center, without any burden of proof whatsoever. An American merely has to be declared a terrorist and they can be abducted off the streets and never seen again.
“The detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority,” writes Ackerman.
The bill gives no rights to the government.
Governments have no rights.
People have rights.
People are born with rights.
People do not get rights from governments.
People have rights, with or with governments, with or without the agreement of governments, as a consequence of people being born with rights.
US government has privileges, given to US government by the US Constitution.
The privileges possessed by the US government are strictly limited to the privileges explicitly provided to the US government in the US Constitution.
There is no authority provided in the US Constitution whereby the government can express the behaviors indicated in the bill.
The bill is Unconstitutional.
The bill is null, and void.
And fuck the government workers for even trying to evade the law of the Constitution.
You have no rights.
None.
These are made up ideas. That is all they are. Imaginary concepts brewed up in your head to make it feel like you deserve something.
But they were all created in the mind. There is no reality to them. Just something like whistling in the dark, to keep you mind off imagined fears.
If we really had the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we would live forever, never get sent to jail or have effin jobs so we could go out parasailing, playing golf, screwing or anything else that makes us happy.
But we die, we get sent to the can and we have to work to get anything in this world. That is reality!
Rights are fiction like Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny and politicians that are honest.
Cursor_
If you do not want to disappear forever, then keep your mouth shut and do not question the better wisdom of your elected representatives.
This is for your own good.
Go back to work and concentrate on being a good employee and try not to think too much.
If you are beginning to think that things are not as they should be, turn on the television and distract yourself with mindless drivel. Play video games. Angry Birds is a nice distraction. Twitter with your friends. Watch sports. Drink a beer.
All is well.
the 4th Reich is alive and well……..
That kind of speech is not allowed.
It is inflammatory and incites passion and ill will against your government.
Your government is doing the best it can. Criticism will only hinder the progress against the war on terror.
When you question and criticize your government, the enemy is given the advantage. You become a traitor to our cause.
Calm down.
You are not smart enough to understand the esoteric legal concepts that your government utilizes to protect you.
Do not be an enemy of the state.
The question was asked:
If Democrats are traditionally Liberal, then what has happened to the so-called Liberal philosophy? I grew up with the understanding that Liberals supported basic human rights, were anti-war, etc. I was a believer. What changed?
Answer: YOU DID!
Anyone who has been around long enough – or at least pays attention – will eventually see that nearly every politician will often say one thing but then do the complete opposite. They will often use warm fuzzy phrases like “freedom”, “equality for all,” and “less taxes” in order to get elected. But once they get power they almost always turn right around, go against these proclaimed principals, and abuse the Constitution.
And in my opinion, liberals are worse! They seem to be the most hypocritical of any political philosophy/group too. Liberals seem all to willing to say anything even when they know better or think they know better. Even if a liberals actions are a direct kick to the gonads they will always deny it. A liberal will almost always try and blame a conservative too cause liberals have always been sneaky like that.
But with conservatives, at least they tell you their objectives and half the time even stick to them. They may still lie from time to time but you have to admire anyone who tells they’re going to hit hit you in the face before they do it.
But hey! They’re all ambulance chasing LAWYERS!!! Republicans and Democrats. Just what did you expect would happen when you get them all in one place? World peace or something?!
Oh, and the purpose of CAC was:
“The CAC’s agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers’s educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland’s ghetto.
In works like “City Kids, City Teachers” and “Teaching the Personal and the Political,” Mr. Ayers wrote that teachers should be community organizers dedicated to provoking resistance to American racism and oppression. His preferred alternative? “I’m a radical, Leftist, small ‘c’ communist,” Mr. Ayers said in an interview in Ron Chepesiuk’s, “Sixties Radicals,” at about the same time Mr. Ayers was forming CAC.
CAC translated Mr. Ayers’s radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with “external partners,” which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).
Mr. Obama once conducted “leadership training” seminars with Acorn, and Acorn members also served as volunteers in Mr. Obama’s early campaigns.”
what has happened to the so-called Liberal philosophy? I grew up with the understanding that Liberals supported basic human rights, were anti-war, etc. I was a believer. What changed?
These rights and beliefs only come into play when you are bashing republicans in power. When their team is in charge, it’s quite different.
U guys lose in the US.
This still needs to pass the House, right?
Seems to me this violates more than a couple sections of the Constitution. So if it passes, it needs to be challenged in the courts. Problem is the courts are fond of throwing cases out claiming the plaintiff has no standing. The only way to get standing in this would be to claim you are a US citizen who is a terrorist or to be arrested and detained under the statute. The first would get you arrested on other charges and the second keeps you from having legal counsel to challenge the law!
Anybody beholden to a party does not think for themselves. They will not do what is right. They will not listen to the people.
You were warned. You were told nothing would change.
All we heard in response were cliches like “fresh air” and “articulate” and “grown up.”
Can you hear me now?
Face it, our politicians are equipped with the morals of gutter cats.
The problem with republics is the same as with monarchies. After a while, the noble intentions at the start are as dead as the noble individuals which founded the kingdom or the republic. (The methods of creation for either are equally bloody.)
If we want a representative government, we’ll have to create it.
If we want smaller government, we’ll have to take out the incentives for its growth.
We’ve become a government OF the thousandaires (the 99%) BY the millionaires (the 1%) FOR the billionaires (the 12,400 individuals identified by the IRS as the people who count (though they don’t really count as they hire some thousandaires to run machines to do that.)
The first thing we do is change from an elected to a selected form of government.
Pick names out an eligible citizen pool and they’re stuck with doing the job for one, and only one, four year term.
There should be no such thing as a career in politics. (The only thing worse than getting stuck with somebody who didn’t want the job is getting stuck with some idiot who did, figuring it was going to lift him a few rungs up the social/economic ladder.)
Eligibility requirements are:
• were you born here or are you a naturalized citizen?
• are you a permanent resident in a village, town or city within our borders?
• are you above the age of 25?
• are you healthy enough? (you don’t suffer from any clinical health issue(s) or mental impairment(s) which would prevent you from fulfilling your duties?)
• have you NEVER served on the government before?
• have you NEVER been found guilty of a violent crime?
• have you NEVER been found to be clinically insane?
Answer yes to all of these questions, you’re eligible for selection.
Don’t want to be bothered?
Go live elsewhere!
That would get rid of all PACs, K Street lobbyists, a lot of graft, waste and expense that WE’RE all paying for.
Do not think for yourself.
You are not as educated as the political elite.
They know what is best for you.
Trust them.
The parties have won and the people have lost.
Corporations now rule everything and everybody.
This country is now in the hands of lawyers and accountants, a humorless bunch of santorum lickers if ever there was one.
Enjoy your, uh, exploitation…
People here seem to be lacking an understanding of what the original bill says and what this amendment is attempting to do. THIS AMENDMENT IS AN ATTEMPT TO PREVENT THE INDEFINITE DETENTION OF AMERICANS WITHOUT TRIAL!!!!! Bill S.1867 is the bill that gave that authority to the President not this amendment. Unfortunately an overwhelming number of Democrats and Republicans voted for that bill.
There were only 16 Democrats that voted against the amendment McCullough. That isn’t a huge shift if philosophy considering this would probably be used against them in an ad saying they voted against the “Protection of America”. The big problem is that so many voted for the original bill probably for that exact reason. But look at the Republican vote record on this bill and it’s amendments. It’s pretty damn solid on the side of detaining Americans indefinably without trial. At least the Democrats were trying to correct that error.
Notice how the Liberals on this blog have all fallen silent. Hey Libs, we want to hear from uou, what say ye?
Probably not paying attention as usual.
If he signs it, I will stop working for him, I sill stop contributing to his campaign and I will not vote for him
– A Liberal
If I was the President, then I would just say, “If this bill passes, the terrorist win and I will therefore indefinitely detain any congressman who voted for this bill. And also my political opponents.”
That speech alone should make the bill fail.
There was an amendment that passed that said this law doesn’t change the rights people have. The White House’s objections are that this right of detention is already existing, no reason to pass a bill about it. Now all the liberals who object will be happy to vote for Obama, I see no primary challengers. Took out Joseph Lieberman, and of course he is still a Senator. Why not go after Obama? Republicans had a primary against George Bush Sr when he raised taxes, so you no longer have Republicans supporting higher taxes.
Link to the original article? (Is there an original article?)
I see the Insane Right-wing Clown Posse is still obsessed with Saul Alinsky and Bill Ayers. They’re stuck in a rut.
That the detention provision is an abomination should be clear to anyone. There. A liberal came out against it. Happy now?
The Wall Street Journal shifted somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun a decade or so ago. The country seems to be following.
msb, how are things in Canada these days?
What ever happened to the so-called ideals of democrats?
Simple. They were never there in the first place.
It was all just a lot of smoke designed to fool the masses and empower communist sympathizers.
The great dumbing down of America worked.
I can’t find a single democrat that has read 1984 or Animal Farm,
let alone one who sees the parallels or implications for OBOZO.
Meanwhile as long as “Privacy” means preserving the freedom to smoke pot all is well with the nanny state as long as your entitlements haven’t run out. The reality is it all works fine until you run out of other people’s money.
I’m Dem and a liberal, and I’ve read both, I’m hoping Obama will sign this so the courts slap it down.
Not sure though, this is not what I voted for him for.
FFS, http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html
Democrats aren’t the ones using the entitlements, we want to educate people so they don’t watch fox news anymore
sorry, poor wording in my previous response and no edit, I’m hoping his intent in signing is so the courts slap it down
The dems are politicians. The reps are politicians. The “independents” are politicians. Politicians are special-interest whores. And the news media are THEIR whores. Do you get it yet?
Just walk away from it. Change the channel. You’ll find more reason and logic in a Monty Python sketch than in any speech or press release.
Also, neckties are the number one cause of reduced blood flow to the brain.
I’m with you McCullough: what happened?
And maybe the answer is within “Whats Wrong with Kansas” and it has just spread to all of America at least to the degree to mount a filibuster against all that is good and holy?
that and a further turn to bought and paid for politicians culminating in the Citizens United case.
Yes–its time for a revolution: another Constitutional Amendment to bring some democracy back to this public but still anonymous auction house.
Tick, tock…………
Several years ago, the CIA informed the White House counterterrorism adviser that it had located a wanted Islamic terrorist and requested White House guidance for how to proceed. The counterterrorism adviser recommended “extraordinary rendition” — snatching the terrorist in a covert operation and secretly whisking him away for interrogation in a foreign country. A White House lawyer demanded a meeting with the president to argue that this would be a violation of international law. In the Oval Office, the lawyer and the counterterrorism adviser argued their cases, when suddenly the vice president walked in. Hearing the lawyer’s objections, he said: “Of course it’s a violation of international law, that’s why it’s a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass.’ ” The rendition was authorized.
Al Gore and Bill Clinton, according a description of the meeting by the counterterrorism adviser, Richard Clarke, in his memoir, “Against All Enemies.”
Their only mistake was is not going all out and taking Bin Laden when he was offered by Sudan, because they couldn’t bring an indictment against him.
I think Democrats stopped being liberals during the Johnson admin. If there were any dangling participles left they quit after ’73.
The Republicans stopped being Reagan conservatives during Clintons last term.
Both parties are now invested in the same concept – the evisceration of the American middle class. Robert Reich spells out the agenda fairly well here. http://robertreich.org/post/13567144944
About the only Democratic President who would not do such a thing is Bartlet, and even he had to be talked into it. Obama gets his cues from the West Wing which is why they moved in the direction of civilian trials.
You liberal rubes figured out Obama yet?
Or do you need some more?
If Obama signs this abomination, a direct violation of the constitution, will you wingnuts FINALLY stop calling him a liberal? Because he isn’t one and probably never has been.
There is nothing liberal about locking people up indefinitely without trial. That’s the police state crap you wingnuts love.
Sheesh.
I listen to No Agenda, and recommend it to others. The current show has a clip (link below) where a big shot says 3 (!) times that Obama was the one who made the bill so that the arresting and holding of American citizens will be legal. Hence, if he vetoes it, he is vetoing himself (the jerk).
http://dropbox.curry.com/ShowNotesArchive/2011/12/NA-364-2011-12-11/Assets/NDAA/Obama%20requested%201031.mp3