Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That provision of the NDAA will go down to just another overreaction to 9-11. Once attacked, Americans will give up anything for the illusion of security. George Bush was a master at it. Wrap it up in the flag, tell Americans it is patriotic and we agree to anything.
As it is, it only has the potential for abuse and we will get over it and move on........we always do
WOW you sound like you're bitching about the NDAA, but you mentioned Geroge bush as being a master of manipulation? You're bitching, but you just can't seem too place the blame where it's due.
Wasn't Obama who put those clauses in the NDAA
He had a choice of vetoing the Defense Authorization in a time of war or holding his nose and signing it
He took the cowards way out
WOW you sound like you're bitching about the NDAA, but you mentioned Geroge bush as being a master of manipulation? You're bitching, but you just can't seem too place the blame where it's due.
Wasn't Obama who put those clauses in the NDAA
He had a choice of vetoing the Defense Authorization in a time of war or holding his nose and signing it
He took the cowards way out
But obama did insist that the indefinite detention clause be added too the bill and he did sign the bill into law.
That provision of the NDAA will go down to just another overreaction to 9-11. Once attacked, Americans will give up anything for the illusion of security. George Bush was a master at it. Wrap it up in the flag, tell Americans it is patriotic and we agree to anything.
As it is, it only has the potential for abuse and we will get over it and move on........we always do
WOW you sound like you're bitching about the NDAA, but you mentioned Geroge bush as being a master of manipulation? You're bitching, but you just can't seem too place the blame where it's due.
Wasn't Obama who put those clauses in the NDAA
He had a choice of vetoing the Defense Authorization in a time of war or holding his nose and signing it
He took the cowards way out
Wasn't Obama who put those clauses in the NDAA
He had a choice of vetoing the Defense Authorization in a time of war or holding his nose and signing it
He took the cowards way out
But obama did insist that the indefinite detention clause be added too the bill and he did sign the bill into law.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/us/politics/obama-wont-veto-military-authorization-bill.html?_r=0
Before the Democrats launched this tremendous and continuous attack on the Second Amendment, I was going about my regular civilian life, unaware of the abuses being done. It's entirely possible for someone just recently awoken by current events to just find out about NDAA.
I didn't even know this NDAA bill existed until today. I realized, for simply dissenting against this government, rather terrible things could happen you. I had a terrible reaction and disconnected my internet for hours, in fact I even announced I was pulling my plug on these forums in this thread.
Before the Democrats launched this tremendous and continuous attack on the Second Amendment, I was going about my regular civilian life, unaware of the abuses being done. It's entirely possible for someone just recently awoken by current events to just find out about NDAA.
I didn't even know this NDAA bill existed until today. I realized, for simply dissenting against this government, rather terrible things could happen you. I had a terrible reaction and disconnected my internet for hours, in fact I even announced I was pulling my plug on these forums in this thread.
Thats the problem, not the law.
Otherwise, your understanding of the law is completely incorrect.
Unfortunately the NDAA can not be discussed in an intelligent, factual, or rational manner as its the propensity of the right to engage in an hysterical misrepresentation of the legislation, making false claims as to the power it affords the government.
It does not authorize the government to indefinitely detain US citizens or LPRAs.
It does not authorize the government to suspend habeas or due process rights.
It does not authorize the government to declare martial law at any time for any reason.
These are but a few examples of the lies told by the right.
The Supreme Court has been consistent with regard to both what constitutes martial law and the protection of citizens due process rights. In Ex parte Milligan (1866), the High Court held that, among other factors, marital law could be declared only in jurisdictions where the courts had ceased to function as a consequence of war. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004), the Court ruled that US citizens are entitled to due process rights, even when detained for suspicion of terrorist acts against the United States.
Given these and other facts, its sheer idiocy or lies maintained by partisan rightwing hacks to suggest that Americans can be snatched off the street, taken to some unknown location, and held in custody absent counsel and a hearing before a neutral magistrate.
NDAA | American Civil Liberties UnionIn December 2011, President Obama signed the 2012 NDAA, codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. The NDAA's dangerous detention provisions would authorize the president and all future presidents to order the military to pick up and indefinitely imprison people captured anywhere in the world, far from any battlefield. The ACLU will fight worldwide detention authority wherever we can, be it in court, in Congress, or internationally.
Under the Bush administration, similar claims of worldwide detention authority were used to hold even a U.S. citizen detained on U.S. soil in military custody, and many in Congress now assert that the NDAA should be used in the same way again. The ACLU believes that any military detention of American citizens or others within the United States is unconstitutional and illegal, including under the NDAA. In addition, the breadth of the NDAAs detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war.
You are very very mistaken. If it doesn't give the military authority to detain civilians why did obama do a signing statement saying he would not use that authority against the civilian population?I didn't even know this NDAA bill existed until today. I realized, for simply dissenting against this government, rather terrible things could happen you. I had a terrible reaction and disconnected my internet for hours, in fact I even announced I was pulling my plug on these forums in this thread.
Thats the problem, not the law.
Otherwise, your understanding of the law is completely incorrect.
Unfortunately the NDAA can not be discussed in an intelligent, factual, or rational manner as its the propensity of the right to engage in an hysterical misrepresentation of the legislation, making false claims as to the power it affords the government.
It does not authorize the government to indefinitely detain US citizens or LPRAs.
It does not authorize the government to suspend habeas or due process rights.
It does not authorize the government to declare martial law at any time for any reason.
These are but a few examples of the lies told by the right.
The Supreme Court has been consistent with regard to both what constitutes martial law and the protection of citizens due process rights. In Ex parte Milligan (1866), the High Court held that, among other factors, marital law could be declared only in jurisdictions where the courts had ceased to function as a consequence of war. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004), the Court ruled that US citizens are entitled to due process rights, even when detained for suspicion of terrorist acts against the United States.
Given these and other facts, its sheer idiocy or lies maintained by partisan rightwing hacks to suggest that Americans can be snatched off the street, taken to some unknown location, and held in custody absent counsel and a hearing before a neutral magistrate.
Tell me, no spin, no garbage, what you think about the NDAA.
Liberals that support the NDAA make me laff. How far you have fallen.
Good! Good!Drama Queen
Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, criticize him at every opportunity!
Soon, Communism will be the Supreme Law of the Land!
Victory is close at hand Komrades!
Good! Good!Drama Queen
Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, criticize him at every opportunity!
Soon, Communism will be the Supreme Law of the Land!
Victory is close at hand Komrades!
Yes, the stock market has doubled in value under President Obama, so I guess we're all commies now! What world are you living in?
Think about it, the very ideas and people that helped create and forge our liberty and freedoms would be spied on and incarcerated nowadays, even before they created a full blown revolution. How ironic that nowadays the very same values that the Founding Fathers created our Nation with are now once again viewed by the powers that be as a threat. Freedom of speech, speaking out against large banks, speaking out against corporations, warning against monopolies. But actually financing terrorists by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, HSBC, Standard Chartered, and all the others which are acting as accomplices to terrorism (including narcoterrorism) and co-conspirators to terrorism isn't putting anyone in those companies on a watch-list or in prison, now is it? And the politicians and lobbyists that accept money from those companies and aid their activities (including writing laws for those criminals) aren't on watch-lists or in prison, are they? Double standards and hypocrisy. Anyway, back to my books and Common Sense
The Founding Fathers would be considered Terrorists today:
Here's a quote I came across on a website that expresses my sentiments.
Think about it, the very ideas and people that helped create and forge our liberty and freedoms would be spied on and incarcerated nowadays, even before they created a full blown revolution. How ironic that nowadays the very same values that the Founding Fathers created our Nation with are now once again viewed by the powers that be as a threat. Freedom of speech, speaking out against large banks, speaking out against corporations, warning against monopolies. But actually financing terrorists by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, HSBC, Standard Chartered, and all the others which are acting as accomplices to terrorism (including narcoterrorism) and co-conspirators to terrorism isn't putting anyone in those companies on a watch-list or in prison, now is it? And the politicians and lobbyists that accept money from those companies and aid their activities (including writing laws for those criminals) aren't on watch-lists or in prison, are they? Double standards and hypocrisy. Anyway, back to my books and Common Sense
I was reading about the NDAA legislation. Having watched many videos on it, and read many articles about it, I came across several Ron Paul Videos. The first one I watched was this one:
Ron Paul vs. Obama and NDAA - YouTube
I didn't even know this NDAA bill existed until today. I realized, for simply dissenting against this government, rather terrible things could happen you. I had a terrible reaction and disconnected my internet for hours, in fact I even announced I was pulling my plug on these forums in this thread.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/280488-ten-gun-myths-and-memes-shot-down.html
Now let me tell you something, I've only cried twice in my male adult life: Once when my father died; today, when I realized the implications of the NDAA legislation, the recent DHS releases, the gun grab and the collapsing US dollar.
Tell me, no spin, no garbage, what you think about the NDAA.
The embolden statement above, that you did not know about NDAA is terrifying to me
Why?
Well look at the handle you gave yourself. It is based on your love of the constitution.
But you didn't know this law was in place and resigned by the POTUS?
No wonder this nation is falling the fuck apart.
People think they know what's happening and they're pissed, but they don't apparently know jackshit about what really happening.
They're so ignroant that they can willing be tools for the R or D criminal organizations that pass bills like NDAA.
I don't mean to offend you, mate, but seriously...
You gotta start paying attention to the NEWS and stop listening to TALKING HEADS.
You and every other POLITICAL PARTISAN in this nation.
Politics isn't a football game, its for real.
Man up and READ A BOOK.
We don't agree much but most of your post I agree with with exception of the news part. I trust the media (cable and national) as much as I trust the government.
The Founding Fathers would be considered Terrorists today:
Here's a quote I came across on a website that expresses my sentiments.
Think about it, the very ideas and people that helped create and forge our liberty and freedoms would be spied on and incarcerated nowadays, even before they created a full blown revolution. How ironic that nowadays the very same values that the Founding Fathers created our Nation with are now once again viewed by the powers that be as a threat. Freedom of speech, speaking out against large banks, speaking out against corporations, warning against monopolies. But actually financing terrorists by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, HSBC, Standard Chartered, and all the others which are acting as accomplices to terrorism (including narcoterrorism) and co-conspirators to terrorism isn't putting anyone in those companies on a watch-list or in prison, now is it? And the politicians and lobbyists that accept money from those companies and aid their activities (including writing laws for those criminals) aren't on watch-lists or in prison, are they? Double standards and hypocrisy. Anyway, back to my books and Common Sense
