[zykron]

Originally Posted by dooshman ↗

Remove the constitution and implement a military dictatorship.

That's not what I implied. Does Canada have a military dictatorship? Does Canada even need one?

[rob666]

Originally Posted by daughterothenight ↗

not sure that everyone is understanding what is happening. the wording has been changed only slightly. we are still in danger now that it has passed both house and senate and obama has already promised that he will not veto this.

yes, the national defense bill has been passed every year for 48 years, but these new sections are scary. 1031, 1032.

The National Defense Appropriations Bill for 2012. SB 1867
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...12s1867pcs.pdf
it's 682 pages long, you need to go to page 359 for section D, Detainee matters, section 1031

i'm going to cut and paste a section that begins on page 360.

13 (2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in
14 paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose de
15 tention is authorized under section 1031 who is de
16 termined—
17 (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-
18 Qaeda or an associated force that acts in co
19 ordination with or pursuant to the direction of
20 al-Qaeda; and
21 (B) to have participated in the course of
22 planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
23 attack against the United States or its coalition
24 partners.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 01:53 Nov 16, 2011 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00361 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1867.PCS S1867 tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
362
•S 1867 PCS
1 (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For
2 purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a per
3 son under the law of war has the meaning given in
4 section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise
5 described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be
6 made unless consistent with the requirements of sec
7 tion 1033.
8 (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.—The
9 Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the
10 Secretary of State and the Director of National In
11 telligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if
12 the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in
13 writing that such a waiver is in the national security
14 interests of the United States.
15 (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
16 AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
17 (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The require
18ment to detain a person in military custody under
19 this section does not extend to citizens of the United
20 States.


First of all, remember the patriot act. the government is allowed to listen/tape the conversations of ANYONE "they" deem a terrorist. and notice on line 23 under COVERED PERSONS, if you are a threat to a coalition partner, you are also a terrorist threat to the united states of america.

line 17 under DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR; read it well, it only says that united states citizens cannot be detained by the military. it does not promise that we will never be detained by any other agency indefinitely.

The American Government has been sub contracting out dirty work since 911, look into the khadr case in Canada.
They ship suspected terrorists to places where human rights don't exist, and get those nations to do the dirty work for them...... they even had the Libyan version of the CIA working for them.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by JONESJIM ↗

Eaton........this has a more than a hint of truth.....more to look into...thanks....think about it ...REMEMBER the US citizen so called muslim terrorist that the US killed off without a jury trial a few months ago that was in the NEWS for LESS THAN A SECOND...

Dude was a terrorist, no "so called" about it.

[johnleeknoefler]

Originally Posted by ColbiasVolk ↗

Whatever happened to "We the People"

We lost our rights bit by bit because of complacency. When you allow a small right to be removed the rest will follow step by step. When you go to pay for a movie at the theater and they demand to see your ID when you pay with a debit card do you protest and raise holy hell? I do. And they back down. Not one time have they refused to sell me a ticket. Of course that could come.
BTW in many states they refuse to look at your ID when you vote. Bank of America is granting accounts to Mexican nationals who have no USA ID and no SS number. But you better have it.
When an officer asks if he can search your car do you refuse or just say meekly let him search? I refuse based on principle.

[JONESJIM]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

Dude was a terrorist, no "so called" about it.

maybeso...STILL he was a citizen...

[johnleeknoefler]

Originally Posted by JONESJIM ↗

maybeso...STILL he was a citizen...

I find it strange that a foreign terrorist is granted constitutional civil rights while a domestic terrorist is denied his constitutional civil rights. Of course a domestic terrorist whose intent is the destruction of our national interests and who acts to terrorize the citizens for political gain should of course be executed. After a trial by jury.
A foreign terrorist of course has no such rights as he is an unlawful enemy combatant. They only have a right to a military tribunal and execution.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by JONESJIM ↗

maybeso...STILL he was a citizen...

So, how many people should die trying to bring him to justice?

[fin_razelle]

Omg that passed....we better all shut. Up before they lock us up.