SEIG HEIL!!! Senate Bill Would LITERALLY Turn The US Into A Fascist Kamp State.....

[Hardrock69]

This bill is dangerous. Would overturn Posse Comatitus, and give the military authority under law to arrest and detain US citizens on US SOIL with no trial, no charges, no nothing......this is the sort of thing that was going on in the early 1930s in Germany......

CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES AND TELL THEM TO DEFEAT THIS BILL.

SECONDLY, THE AUTHORS OF THIS BILL MUST BE FUCKING DEFEATED IN THE 2012 ELECTIONS, OR YOUR CHILDREN COULD BE GOOSESTEPPING DOWN THE HALLWAYS OF THE KAMP SCHOOL THEY WILL BE ATTENDING!

SEIG HEIL!!! :mad:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/senate-moves-to-allow-military-to-intern-americans-without-trial.html


Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial


NDAA detention provision would turn America into a “battlefield”

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Saturday, November 26, 2011

The Senate is set to vote on a bill next week that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

“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. 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,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.
Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor Monday, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.
The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing. The language appears in sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA bill.
“I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech last week. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.”

This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.

“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?” asks Anders.
The ACLU is urging citizens to call their Senator and demand that the Udall Amendment be added to the bill, a change that would at least act as a check to prevent Americans being snatched off the streets without some form of Congressional oversight.
We have been warning for over a decade that Americans would become the target of laws supposedly aimed at terrorists and enemy combatants. Alex Jones personally documented how U.S. troops were being trained to arrest U.S. citizens in the event of martial law during urban warfare training drills back in the 90′s. Under the the National Defense Authorization Act bill, no declaration of martial law is necessary since Americans would now be subject to the same treatment as suspected insurgents in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
If you thought that the executive assassination of American citizens abroad was bad enough, now similar powers will be extended to the “homeland,” in other words, your town, your community, your back yard.

[Nitro Express]

I'm starting to think we should just hang the fuckers for treason. All of those senators swore an oath to uphold the US Constitution. The members of the military swear an oath to protect the US Constitution against enemies foreign and DOMESTIC. If anything these enemies are exposing themselves. Nice going McCain. I always knew you were a piece of shit. They should have just left you in the Hanoi Hilton to rot.

To be honest, I think a lot of these law makers know the gig is up. They look at what's going on with all these protests and they are scared. They know many of them will get the boot this next election so they are going to try and use force to clamp down on the people. I doubt a good percentage of the military would follow orders to arrest innocent US citizens but they might use mercenary thugs like BlackWater to do it.

Hitler had to organize the SS because not even he could control the German military. So he created the SS to intimidate and bully the regular military and it was the regular military that tried to kill Hitler. Much of what happened in Germany is what the politicians are trying to do here. I think this year before the election we are just going to see how nasty these assholes in office want to get.

[Satan]

Hard to believe Carl Levin would do something like this. Lieberman? definitely. Ben Nelson or Max Baucus? Quite possibly. McCain & Miss Lindsey? No surprise at all.

Carl fucking Levin???

[Satan]

Tuesday 29 November 2011
by: Ralph Lopez, War Is a Crime | Op-Ed
(http://www.truth-out.org/arrest-mccain-and-levin-now-senate-vote-military-detention-americans/1322601515)
Why would Founders create a class of criminal, "domestic enemies" of the "United States Constitution," if there were no such thing?

If you think soldiers won't do it, think again. Some of the stupidest people on Earth join the Army, and they, in contrast to the many intelligent young patriots who join for the right reasons, will always be there. Reading blogs arguing about Posse Comitatus and martial law I've seen comments like "I expect I might be picking a few civvies (civilians) off the wire someday...but I like my home on base and my kids need the nice playground. Life is good."

I also have close relatives in. I couldn't make this up.

Now Chris Anders, Legislative Counsel for the ACLU writes:

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....

Anders warns us that 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 (today) for the beginning of debate.

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. Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians without charge or trial.

In an unusual closing of ranks, many conservative websites have picked up and run the ACLU Alert either verbatim or as part of their own action alerts. ConservativeByte.com in "Senate Moves To Allow Military To Arrest Americans Without Charge Or Trial" writes:

The Senate is set to vote on a bill today that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

Translation: this is not a liberal or conservative thing. This is an American thing.

In support of the bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

Anders in his legislative alert asks a good question: Why now?

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?

Although Obama has threatened to veto the bill over the provision, this is not the first time McCain has revealed his totalitarian, un-American impulses. Last year he was lead sponsor S. 3081 which outlined the process by which Americans may be held indefinitely, without notice of their Miranda Rights, and without ever being charged with a crime, after being arrested in their own country. Due to popular outcry, the bill never became law.

What today's action tells us is that this was not a one-off by McCain and whatever anti-Constitution gang he can round up at the moment. He will keep trying until this president or another one signs it. The ACLU is recommending people lobby their senators to support the Udall Amendment which will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a "requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power."

I have a better idea. In crafting this backroom deal and attempting to form what amounts to an anti-Constitution faction, McCain and Levin have betrayed their primary oath of office to "protect, uphold and defend the United States Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic."

Although the Bill of Rights has been steadily eroded since the arrest of American citizen Jose Padilla as an "enemy combatant" by the Bush administration, Bush released him to a civilian trial just before his detention was properly tested in the Supreme Court, after being upheld in the Fourth Circuit. The test would have been whether "enemy combatant" or any other abrogation of the Bill of Rights which applied to traditional war could apply in the first open-ended "war" from which, as the "enemy" is a loose network rather than a hierarchy, there is no one from whom to accept surrender. Thus the question has been left open, until this attempt to codify what is in essence flatly unconstitutional.

At his trial none of the original plots alleged by the government against Padilla, such as a plan to blow up a "dirty bomb" in New York or blow up apartments using gas lines, were ever mentioned. He was convicted mainly on the strength of an Al-Qaeda "application form" which included a line for "emergency contact." Not only would this laughable measure point an incriminating finger at whomever was listed, it flies in the face of interviews with Jihadis who say when you go to Jihad, if you tell your family anything, you tell them only that you will not be coming back.

Interestingly, the attorney for another terrorism suspect, Binyam Mohamed, said that during his imprisonment in CIA "black box" prisons, he was told that he would be implicating people such as Padilla, under torture, which included slicing his genitals with razor blades. Attorney Clive Stafford Smith said his client told him:

" Some of the time they said that some big people in al-Qaeda were talking about me. Some of the time they told me that the U.S. had a story they wanted from me and it was their job to get it. They talked about Jose Padilla and they said I was going to testify against him and big people. They named Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Ibn Sheikh al-Libi. I was meant to be working with these people, giving them ideas like the dirty bomb. It is hard to pin down the exact story, because what they wanted changed all the time. First in Morocco it changed, then when I was in the Dark Prison, then in Bagram and again in Guantanamo Bay."

Smith explains this in his book "The Eight O'Clock Ferry to the Windward Side." Andy Worthington writes:

"The U.S. authorities insisted that Padilla and Binyam had dinner with various high-up members of al-Qaeda the night before Padilla was to fly off to America. According to their theory the dinner party had to have been on the evening of April 3rd in Karachi, Binyam was meant to have dined with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah, Sheikh al-Libi, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Jose Padilla." What made the scenario "absurd," as Stafford Smith pointed out, was that "two of the conspirators were already in U.S. custody at the time -- Abu Zubaydah was seized six days before, on 28 March 2002, and al-Libi had been held since November 2001."

The Founders created two categories of enemies in the Oath of Office: foreign and domestic. Furthermore, they stipulated that the enemies to be primarily defended against would be not enemies of the president, nor even of the nation at large, but specifically enemies of "the United States Constitution," enshrined in the founding document. The Constitution declares in the Sixth Amendment of the Bill of Rights that:

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

The creation of a permanent state of war in the "war on terror" is precisely what the Founders warned of the most strenuously. McCain and Levin have treacherously undertaken to overturn the Bill of Rights of the Constitution permanently through this device. Since the Constitution, in the Oath of Office, essentially creates a class of criminal, a "domestic enemy" of the "United States Constitution," it is incumbent upon loyal senators to declare treason within their midst, and to direct the Sergeant at Arms to effect the arrest of John McCain and Carl Levin as such domestic enemies.

This has been a long time coming.

"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. . . . [There is also an] inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and . . . degeneracy of manners and of morals. . . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare..." - James Madison

US Congress:
202-224-3121

Please send them this link and article in their contact form:
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

[Nitro Express]

Let's just get something straight. It doesn't matter what kind of laws they pass if they are in direct violation of the US Constitution they are illegal. Period. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and over rides everything else and only can be changed if there is a majority vote to amend it as described in the constitution itself. One of the main purposes of the US Supreme Court is to determine whether laws are constitutional or not.

If we are just going to let elected officials and even non elected technocrats roll over the constitution, take our rights away then we are a pretty pathetic bunch of citizens. If members of the military choose to follow the orders of people who are in direct violation of the constitution they swore to defend they are sorry pieces of shit. I never thought I would see all the branches of government decline into such a shitty mess. It's nothing more than a corrupt broken government that can't even cut some spending out of it's bloated ass budget.

It's so bad I say we fire all the fuckers. I think they know that's coming so what are they going to do, get thuggish and try to intimidate us so they can bully us some more. What do they want to do roll the protestors over with tanks now? Who runs the military are the generals. I doubt all of them would go along with it. I doubt the commanders under these generals would all go for it either. I see it splitting the military and the last time that happened in this country was the civil war.

Any sane president would veto this bill. Shit. I'm glad McCain lost the election. Not that Obama is any good but at least he isn't a crazy nut job like McCain. The thought of McCain and Palin in the White House is one damn scary thought. He should be removed from office for mental health reason. What a looney.

[Nitro Express]

My father in law never could stand McCain. He was a veteran and worked in the military side of Boeing so he dealt with military people all the time and said he had heard from former POW's that McCain was a collaborator. I think the old man can't hide the bullshit anymore. Clearly an enemy of the country he claims to serve. Man things are getting weird.

[Nitro Express]

Hard to believe Carl Levin would do something like this. Lieberman? definitely. Ben Nelson or Max Baucus? Quite possibly. McCain & Miss Lindsey? No surprise at all.

Carl fucking Levin???

It's like some magical force is showing us who all the bad guys are. This is like some who done it movie. I'm starting to think if McCain would have gotten in he would have taken more rights away than Obama has. Obama is sneaky and stealthy. McCain would have just gone nuts. We probably would have already attacked Iran by now and would be in the thick of it. Possibly World War III with the government declaring marshal law here. We might have actually got the less of two evils with Obama. At least we are all still alive with McCain who knows what rabbit hole we would have gone down.

[BigBadBrian]

Lock and Load.

[Nitro Express]

Washington DC and Wall Street are like a big boil that suddenly burst and we are seeing the open sore and all the puss running out of it, trying not to get soaked ourselves while trying to figure out how to heal the wound while everyone is running off in panic.

[Nitro Express]

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) emerged from the meeting -- where former Vice President Dick Cheney was in attendance -- saying his colleagues had "a spirited discussion" about Udall's amendment, and predicted nearly all Republicans would oppose the amendment, as they did.



This is from an article today regarding the proposed legislation. I guess it should be of no suprise Dick Cheney was in attendance. Our own real world Darth Vader.

[Hardrock69]

Here.....FUCK McCAIN! Goddam motherfucking traitor asshole motherfucker! :mad:

Website has a buncha photos to go along with the text below...

http://www.usvetdsp.com/mccainpic.htm


John McCain, the second term Republican senator from Arizona and former Navy pilot captured and held prisoner during the Vietnam War, is a fraud, collaborator, and danger to the security of the United States.

McCain, who claims he was brutally tortured by the communist Vietnamese, ironically emerged, as early as 1986, as Hanoi's leading advocate for normalized relations with the United States.


McCain's high-profile and unrelenting support for a government that brutally tortured and murdered his fellow POWs has caused POW/MIA family members and fellow Vietnam veterans to question the senator and his motivations.

They ask what drives McCain, who owes his public life to the tag "former POW," to work so hard for Hanoi and so diligently to discredit any possibility, in fact the probability, that Hanoi held back live U.S. prisoners of war after the 1973 prisoner release.

The POW/MIA families point out that they worked hard during the Vietnam War to secure POW McCain's freedom when he was being held by the communists and the families want to know why he is now betraying them today in their efforts to get answers about their missing loved ones.

From the first days of McCain's captivity, he seriously violated the military Code of Conduct, which outlines the basic responsibilities and obligations of members of the Armed Forces of the United States who have been captured by the enemy.

According to documentation obtained by the U.S. Veteran Dispatch, not only did POW McCain promise to give the communists "military information" in exchange for special hospital care not ordinarily available to U.S. prisoners, but he also made numerous antiwar radio broadcasts.

Article V of the Code of Conduct is very specific in declaring that U.S. military personnel are required to avoid answering questions to the utmost of their ability and to make no oral or written statements disloyal to the United States and its allies or harmful to their cause. Any violation of this code is considered collaborating with the enemy.

The following is McCain's own admission of collaboration in an article he wrote, printed May 14, 1973 in U.S. News and World Report:

"I think it was on the fourth day [after being shot down] that two guards came in, instead of one. One of them pulled back the blanket to show the other guard my injury. I looked at my knee. It was about the size, shape and color of a football. I remembered that when I was a flying instructor a fellow had ejected from his plane and broken his thigh. He had gone into shock, the blood had pooled in his leg, and he died, which came as quite a surprise to usa man dying of a broken leg.

Then I realized that a very similar thing was happening to me.

"When I saw it, I said to the guard, `O.K., get the officer.'

"An officer came in after a few minutes. It was the man that we came to know very well as `The Bug.' He was a psychotic torturer, one of the worst fiends that we had to deal with. I said, `O.K., I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital.'"

McCain claims it was only a coincidence that, about the same time he was begging to be taken to a hospital, the Vietnamese learned his father was Admiral John S. McCain, Jr., commander of all U.S. forces in Europe and soontobe commander of all U.S. forces in the Pacific, including Vietnam.

McCain has admitted that he survived only because the Vietnamese learned who his father was and rushed him to a hospital where his wounds were eagerly treated. He has also conceded that the Vietnamese repeatedly threatened to withhold much needed operations unless he would give them information.

The former POW admitted in the U.S. News and World Report article that the Vietnamese usually left other U.S. prisoners with similar wounds to die, not wishing to waste medication on them. McCain pointed out "there were hardly any amputees among the prisoners who came back because the North Vietnamese just would not give medical treatment to someone who was badly injured. They weren't going to waste their time."

The communists figured that because POW McCain's father was of such high military rank, McCain was of royalty and the governing circle. They bragged that they had captured "the crown prince" and treated him as a "special prisoner."

"Dr. Fernando Barral, a Spanish psychiatrist residing in Cuba, returned from the Democratic Republic of Vietnam . . . he brought back some journalistic news: an interview with a North American pilot captured in the DRV after bombing Hanoi on 26 October 1967. The meeting between him and the pilot took place in an office of the Committee for Foreign Cultural Relations in Hanoi. The pilot interviewed is Lt Cmdr John Sidney McCain [left], son and grandson of American Navy Admirals.

"In the course of the interview, on various occasions he showed that knowledge of the language, saying some words, dates, and so forth in Spanish, or [using it] when he thought the interpreter was seeking the corresponding French word.

"Naturally, from the beginning this established a more direct communication between us, and more than one question or my response was made directly in Spanish." Havana Granma January 24, 1970

U.S. Veteran Dispatch Editor's note: In case you missed it, McCain's meeting with the Cuban "took place in an office of the Committee for Foreign Cultural Relations in Hanoi" away from the POW camp.

When Col. Bui Tin, a former Senior Colonel in the North Vietnamese Army (he had actually interrogated McCain and other U.S. prisoners) testified before the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs in 1992, McCain did not display that same "pit bull" inclination to attack as he did when the POW/MIA families and activists were testifiying.

During a break in the hearing, Sen. McCain moved to where Col. Bui Tin was seated and warmly embraced him as if he were a long lost brother.

Sen. John McCain (left) warmly greeted Vietnam Prime Minister Vo Van Kiet (right) during a 1992 visit to Hanoi. Kiet was a ranking communist party member of the secret Central Committee of the former National Liberation Front (Viet Cong), and was part of the elite clique responsible for setting policies and directing the communist war waged against the prodemocracy Vietnamese as well as U.S. forces in South Vietnam.

As a senior Central Committee member, Kiet ordered American POWs to be punished by execution and helped formulate the Vietnamese communist policy which resulted in the murder of thousands of proU.S. South Vietnamese in Hue during the Tet Offensive of 1968. Communist Party henchmen executed over 5,000 men, women, and children, burying many of them alive in mass graves during the brief time North Vietnamese troops held that historic ancient Vietnamese city.

July 11, 1995 Sen. Jonh McCain, R-Ariz., (right), and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., (center), gave President Bill Clinton, (left), the valuable political cover he needed to remove the U.S. imposed trade embargo against communist Vietnam. All major U.S. veterans organizations, the two POW/MIA family groups, and the majority of VietnameseAmericans in this country opposed Clinton's lifting of the embargo.

Senator McCain (left) is pictured above embracing Mai Van On in Hanoi, November 13, 1996. On identified himself as one of the Vietnamese who pulled McCain from Hanoi's Truc Bach Lake, where McCain parachuted in 1967 after his bomber was shot down. McCain has said, many times, that, after pulling him from the lake, the Vietnamese brutally beat him and stabbed him with a bayonet.

[Nitro Express]

Unbelievable. He makes Jane Fonda look like a patriot.

I guess McCain learned how to run a police state from his commie captors and can't wait to turn the US into one.

[FORD]

And now, a word from Captain Hikaru Sulu, United Federation of Planets.......

Never Again

I grew up in an internment camp, and no one American ever again should have to

http://ddcache1.net/allegiance.SE288/sites/main/files/imagecache/medium/main-images/takeirohwer_f.jpeg
A picture of me, at the time my family was incarcerated in Rohwer camp in Arkansas

Nearly 70 years ago, Executive Order 9066 authorized the U.S. military to remove any person from designated "military zones" without charge, trial or any kind of due process. This Order led to the forced evacuation and internment over over 120,000 Japanese Americans, two thirds of whom, including myself, my siblings, and my mother, were U.S. citizens. I spent over four years in two of America's internment camps, in Rohwer, Arkansas and Tule Lake, California, simply because I and my family happen to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor.

Now a bill proposed in the U.S. Senate, S. 1253 (McCain/Levin) would authorize a similar sweeping authority, granted to the President, to order the detention--without charge or trial--of any person even suspected of being associated with a "terrorist organization." I could scarcely believe my eyes when I saw that we hadn't learned from the terrible lessons of the past.

We are a nation of laws, and we have a Constitution that guarantees certain inalienable rights, including the right to liberty, the right to a jury trial, and the right against unlawful search and seizure. And yet, in times of trouble, how quickly these cornerstones of our freedom are abandoned. We must be constantly vigilant against tyranny and injustice of all forms, especially when it isn't politically expedient.

Please share this article (http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_19413004) and write to your senator, telling her or him to vote against S.1253, and to say loudly and clearly: "Never Again."

--GHT

[Nitro Express]

http://news.yahoo.com/senate-approves-662-billion-defense-bill-012555722.html

The nut case senate just approved the bill. Unbelievable. What fucking traitors! It's out in the open now. The senate just declared war on us.

[FORD]

Supposedly Diane Feinstein added an amendment that made it somewhat less fascist, at least as far as US citizens and legal residents are concerned. I'm not exactly her biggest fan, as she's barely a Democrat, and her "defense" contractor husband is making millions from these illegal wars. But the story - as reported - sounds like better news than the original bill, at least......

Senate clears detainee compromise setting stage for Defense authorization passage
By Josiah Ryan and Jeremy Herb - 12/01/11 06:52 PM ET

The Senate on Thursday night overwhelmingly cleared an eleventh hour compromise on the terrorist detainee provision of the defense authorization bill clearing the way for passage and possibly dodging a veto from the White House.

The compromise amendment from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), cleared 99-1, clarifies that the controversial section of the bill that suggests individuals apprehended in the U.S. who are suspected of terrorism ought to be detained by the military, would in no way pertain to U.S. citizens, lawful resident aliens or anyone captured or arrested in the U.S.

It is still unclear clear whether the change will satisfy the White House, which has threatened to veto the Defense bill over the detainee provisions early last month.

The Obama administration expressed its opposition to the use of military detention within the United States, but also had concerns over tying the hands of law enforcement officials by mandating military custody and prosecution of al Qaeda members. The administration also opposes restrictions on transferring Guantanamo detainees.

A half-dozen senators huddled on the Senate floor late Thursday afternoon to reach the deal as time wound down on debate. The new Feinstein amendment would get a vote as well as her original amendment, which was opposed by Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.), ranking member Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Those senators all said they supported the second Feinstein amendment because it does not change existing law, unlike the original amendment.

Levin and the Armed Services Republicans believe that the U.S. can already hold citizens indefinitely by the military, which Feinstein and others disagree with.

“I think a lot has been gained, a clear understanding has been gained of the problems inherent in the original bill,” Feinstein said on the floor. “I think members came to the conclusion they did not want to change present law.”

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), an opponent of the detainee rules in the current bill, said he agreed with the compromise.

“The Supreme Court will decide who can be detained. The Senate will not,” Durbin said.

The full Senate bill is expected to pass later on Thursday evening after amendments are considered. If the bill passes, it would go to conference to reconcile with the House bill. Graham said he’s committed to keeping the amendment in the conference report.

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) was the one dissenting vote.
Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/196719-senate-clears-detainee-compromise-clearing-way-for-passage-of-defense-authorization

....oh and BTW, Jon Kyl.... FUCK YOU AND THE RUG ON YOUR HEAD, YOU NAZI FUCK !! :meinsmiley:

[Nitro Express]

The Senate rejected an effort by Feinstein to limit a military custody requirement for suspects to those captured outside the United States. The vote was 55-45. Feinstein said her goal was to ensure "the military won't be roaming our streets looking for suspected terrorists."
The issue divided Democrats, with nine senators, many facing re-election next year, breaking with their leadership and administration to vote against the amendment. Republicans held firm, with only Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mark Kirk of Illinois and Mike Lee of Utah backing Feinstein's effort.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/01/senate-approves-662-billion-defense-bill/#ixzz1fLiX65ED

I can't believe only Rand Paul and Mark Kirk agreed with Feinstein. They might as well set the constitution on fire in the Senate chambers. Time to fire them all. Hell the way it's going they will find a way to stop the election. I remember some old fart WWII veteran telling us that we always had to be on top of the politicians because if we got complacent they would take our freedom away. No shit. He knew what he was talking about.

[Nitro Express]

Now it's off to the Bone Head (Boehner) club to see if they are as corrupt to approve it and send it to Oh bummer at the White House.

[FORD]

I can't believe only Rand Paul and Mark Kirk agreed with Feinstein. They might as well set the constitution on fire in the Senate chambers. Time to fire them all. Hell the way it's going they will find a way to stop the election. I remember some old fart WWII veteran telling us that we always had to be on top of the politicians because if we got complacent they would take our freedom away. No shit. He knew what he was talking about.

And yet one of the bastards who was willing to vote for this piece of shit - BEFORE the Feinstein amendment even - was not only a WWII veteran himself, but also a Japanese-American, who is no doubt aware of the internment camps spoken of by George Takei above, even though he didn't have to be in one himself, being in the military at the time.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Daniel_Inouye_official_portrait.jpg/220px-Daniel_Inouye_official_portrait.jpg
It's not Daniel Inouye's first stupid vote since the BCE coup of 12/12/2000, but it damn well could be one of the worst. He, of all people, should have known better :(

[Nitro Express]

That's some sorry shit. Politics just seems to attract some of the most evil people. It's not stupidity, it's just down right evil. I mean John McCain and now this guy. Some of the worst kind of sellouts.

[Seshmeister]

And yet one of the bastards who was willing to vote for this piece of shit - BEFORE the Feinstein amendment even - was not only a WWII veteran himself, but also a Japanese-American, who is no doubt aware of the internment camps spoken of by George Takei above, even though he didn't have to be in one himself, being in the military at the time.


Ironically since then George has been in a number of camp Americans...

[Seshmeister]

The US needs to sign up to the International Criminal Court. You need some sort of supra government guarantee these days because the politicians can't be trusted. At least we know if they pull some shit here we have a safety net of the European or International courts to challenge these people.

[Nickdfresh]

Is this that FEMA Camp shit again?

[Nitro Express]

At least one of the senators bothered to read the US Constitution and hey guess what, the proposed bill is unconstitutional.

[Seshmeister]

I honestly think that something has gone wrong with McCain's mind over the last few years, thank fuck he never became president.

Why is it that politics is the one job where 75 isn't seen as being too old to function at the highest level?

[FORD]

Is this that FEMA Camp shit again?

No, this is the right wing version of that.....

"Terraists are everywhere, hiding behind ev'ry goddamn corner and if we cain't round em all up even when they just LOOK guilty, theys gonna kill us all!!!!"

Or basically, idiots in Congress still buying into the PNAC/Likud fictional script.

[Nitro Express]

If they are so concerned about terrorist how come they don't enforce the border using the the laws already on the books? We probably have over 40 million illegal immigrants here right now. Someone isn't doing their job. Also, as wide open as we are to terrorism where is it? If I were a terrorist I would hit the power grid knowing transformers are hard to replace you target key substations. Hell, you can shoot down the high tension lines with just a high powered rifle with a scope. Easy enough. None of this has happend in a decade. I've just seen the politicians using the threat of terror to start questionable wars and take our constitutional rights away. They have not only broke the supreme law of this country but international law. It's like the boy who cried wolf. Every time the crooks in Washington DC cry terror I just don't buy it and wonder what they are going to take next.

[DONNIEP]

This is just one more example, in a long list, of ways the U.S. government is trying to take away our rights. Detention without trial??? Worked pretty good for Hitler, why not here? What in the fucking hell are these assholes thinking??? What happened to this country that we've allowed these pus-nutted pieces of shit to not only disregard the Constitution but to piss all over it?

[Nitro Express]

I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[26]

Above is the oath every US Senator takes before taking office. Apparently they don't take the oath of office or the US Constitution seriously. You know, things like forbidding the military to act as the domestic police force and holding people indefinitely without a free and open trial.

[Nitro Express]

I honestly think that something has gone wrong with McCain's mind over the last few years, thank fuck he never became president.

Why is it that politics is the one job where 75 isn't seen as being too old to function at the highest level?

Obama has burned through trillions of dollars, broke about every campaign promise he made, and participated in a sickening healthcare scam that means higher costs and less care but if McCain would have gotten in, we would be in World War III by now and we would have marshall law already. He would set the whole fucking middle east on fire.

[Hardrock69]

Nitro.....since McCain and that other asshole are trying enact laws that are unconstitutional, it is quite obvious they are breaking their oath and need to be thrown out of Congress! :mad:

[Nitro Express]

Nitro.....since McCain and that other asshole are trying enact laws that are unconstitutional, it is quite obvious they are breaking their oath and need to be thrown out of Congress! :mad:

Everyone is furious. A relative of mine works for one of the senators that voted for the bill and she has been getting an ear full. The shocking thing is the vast majority of the senate voted for it so now what? A third of these assholes will come up for re-election next November. What they did was break their oath and commit treason. Almost the whole senate. The House of Representatives can impeach them but then the Senate has to vote on their own impeachment. That isn't going to work. I don't know if states can recall their senators.

This is just a horrid, weird situation. From a legal standpoint, the military swears the same oath. Any military official that arrests a US citizen is breaking their oath as well and what exactly does it mean to protect the constitution from domestic enemies? Have the military remove the senators at the end of a bayonet? I don't think the country has ever been in this situation. In the civil war you had the senate divided up along state issues but this situation is not unique to one group of states vs. another.

Honestly. I wonder how many of the dim wits even knew what they were voting on.

But McCain and the other asshole will be the fall guys. All fingers will point to them as the perpetrators and maybe the senate would vote "aye" on impeaching their sorry asses. Or hell, let's just have the sargeant at arms arrest them. Or heck, let's just call them terrorists and have the military take them off to Gitmo never to be heard from again.

[Hardrock69]

Who is the Sergeant At Arms in Congress? Perhaps an email campaign is in order to force him to do his job....


As chief law enforcement officer of the Senate, the Sergeant at Arms is charged with maintaining security in the Capitol and all Senate buildings, as well as protection of the members themselves. The Sergeant at Arms serves as the executive officer of the Senate for enforcement of all rules of the Committee on Rules and Administration regulating the Senate Wing of the Capitol and the Senate Office Buildings and has responsibility for and immediate supervision of the Senate floor, chamber and galleries. The Sergeant at Arms is authorized to arrest and detain any person violating Senate rules, including the President of the United States.



The current Sergeant At Arms is Terrance W. Gainer.

Senators Levin and McCain need to be and are required by law to be arrested for treason.

They have broken their oath they took upon themselves and need to be removed from Congress.

[Seshmeister]

Obama has burned through trillions of dollars, broke about every campaign promise he made, and participated in a sickening healthcare scam that means higher costs and less care but if McCain would have gotten in, we would be in World War III by now and we would have marshall law already. He would set the whole fucking middle east on fire.

I remember listening to McCain being interviewed for 30 minutes over here about 8 years ago and he seemed very sensible. Back around 2002 Gulliani was impressive too. Something seems to happen to politicians over time, I strongly believe we should adopt the US rule of 2 terms maximum for our prime ministers and maybe everyone should be limited to 3 or 4 terms as congressmen/MPs because these people seem to be badly affected over time whether it be an endemic corruption or just that their ego goes out of control and they lose sight of the ball.

I think you often get the same thing with cops. It would also stop career politicians, half the main people here have never had a proper job.

[BigBadBrian]

Evidently this thing doesn't apply to US citizens. I haven't read the whole thing though.

LINK (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf)

21 SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
22 (a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF
23 WAR.—
24 (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para25
graph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States
429
† S 1867 ES
1 shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who
2 is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by
3 the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public
4 Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition
5 under the law of war.


6 (2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in
7 paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose de8
tention is authorized under section 1031 who is de9
termined—
10 (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-
11 Qaeda or an associated force that acts in co12
ordination with or pursuant to the direction of
13 al-Qaeda; and
14 (B) to have participated in the course of
15 planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
16 attack against the United States or its coalition
17 partners.
18 (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For
19 purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a per20
son under the law of war has the meaning given in
21 section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise
22 described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be
23 made unless consistent with the requirements of sec24
tion 1033.
430
† S 1867 ES

1 (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.—The
2 Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the
3 Secretary of State and the Director of National In4
telligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if
5 the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in
6 writing that such a waiver is in the national security
7 interests of the United States.

8 (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
9 AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
10 (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The require11
ment to detain a person in military custody under
12 this section does not extend to citizens of the United
13 States.

14 (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The require15
ment to detain a person in military custody under
16 this section does not extend to a lawful resident
17 alien of the United States on the basis of conduct
18 taking place within the United States, except to the
19 extent permitted by the Constitution of the United
20 States.

[Nitro Express]

I remember listening to McCain being interviewed for 30 minutes over here about 8 years ago and he seemed very sensible. Back around 2002 Gulliani was impressive too. Something seems to happen to politicians over time, I strongly believe we should adopt the US rule of 2 terms maximum for our prime ministers and maybe everyone should be limited to 3 or 4 terms as congressmen/MPs because these people seem to be badly affected over time whether it be an endemic corruption or just that their ego goes out of control and they lose sight of the ball.

I think you often get the same thing with cops. It would also stop career politicians, half the main people here have never had a proper job.

Oh a childhood friend of my father got into politics. He started off as a mayor and then worked his way up to being a US Congressmen. Then he got involved in some corruption and because he was a junior congressmen and not well connected went to prison. My dad was shocked. He said he was honest but something changed him in Washington. I think when you are around all the bribes, corruption, and who knows what kind of threats these guys get behind the scenes and the blackmail involved it changes people. The old saying you can't play in the dirt without getting dirty probably has a lot to do with it.

Then you just have the politicians that vote the party line. They don't bother to read the bills and just rubber stamp them. As long as they tow the party line they get re-elected.

I've seen this country divided between the Democrat and Republican lines my whole life. The partisan bickering has been the worst I have ever seem in the last decade. If anything, when senators blatantly ignore the US Constitution and threaten the citizens, it wakes us up and unifies us. We can argue over issues like military spending and healthcare but when the government puts us all on an enemy list it unifies the public. We all agree the politicians have taken too much power, are breaking the law of the land and it needs to stop. I think this will backfire badly on the out of touch jerks in Washington. They have exposed their corruption and crossed the line.

[Nitro Express]

Who is the Sergeant At Arms in Congress? Perhaps an email campaign is in order to force him to do his job....




The current Sergeant At Arms is Terrance W. Gainer.

Senators Levin and McCain need to be and are required by law to be arrested for treason.

They have broken their oath they took upon themselves and need to be removed from Congress.

How many US Presidents have violated the US Constitution and never got arrested for it? Bush, Obama not to mention others. Yeah, that sergeant at arms has been asleep for a long time.

[FORD]

Evidently this thing doesn't apply to US citizens. I haven't read the whole thing though.

LINK (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf)

21 SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
22 (a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF
23 WAR.—
24 (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para25
graph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States
429
† S 1867 ES
1 shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who
2 is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by
3 the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public
4 Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition
5 under the law of war.


6 (2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in
7 paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose de8
tention is authorized under section 1031 who is de9
termined—
10 (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-
11 Qaeda or an associated force that acts in co12
ordination with or pursuant to the direction of
13 al-Qaeda; and
14 (B) to have participated in the course of
15 planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
16 attack against the United States or its coalition
17 partners.
18 (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For
19 purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a per20
son under the law of war has the meaning given in
21 section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise
22 described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be
23 made unless consistent with the requirements of sec24
tion 1033.
430
† S 1867 ES

1 (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.—The
2 Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the
3 Secretary of State and the Director of National In4
telligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if
5 the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in
6 writing that such a waiver is in the national security
7 interests of the United States.

8 (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
9 AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
10 (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The require11
ment to detain a person in military custody under
12 this section does not extend to citizens of the United
13 States.

14 (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The require15
ment to detain a person in military custody under
16 this section does not extend to a lawful resident
17 alien of the United States on the basis of conduct
18 taking place within the United States, except to the
19 extent permitted by the Constitution of the United
20 States.

The sections you enlarged are only there due to Feinstein's amendment. Before that, there was no such distinction. For that matter, to specify that this act is about members of "Al Qaeda" is completely fucking ridiculous, as the concept of "Al Qaeda" is about 95% pure fiction in the first place. There is no such thing as "Al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula", or "Al Qaeda of Iraq" and certainly never has been any such thing as "Al Qaeda of America" - unless you count the fact that the actual Al Qaeda was invented in Langley VA. Anybody who believed those Adam Pearlman videos is simply too stupid for words.

Back in the 1990's we actually stopped some real terrorists by using actual Constitutional legal procedures, and prosecuted others who succeeded in their crimes. The system worked. Not perfect (nothing is) but fully functional, and the results prove it. No need for all this fear based fascist bullshit.

[Nickdfresh]

This is a silly law, let the FBI and other state and local law enforcement and counter-terrorist entities do their work without over-militarizing everything...

[Hardrock69]

Posse Comatitus.

[Hardrock69]

Big Bad Brucie WISHES it applied to US Citizens. He has probably been goose-stepping around the house since the bill was first introduced.

[Nitro Express]

ack in the 1990's we actually stopped some real terrorists by using actual Constitutional legal procedures, and prosecuted others who succeeded in their crimes. The system worked. Not perfect (nothing is) but fully functional, and the results prove it. No need for all this fear based fascist bullshit.

I'm for the constitutional system as well. Basically the constitution states all human beings have inalienable rights. So give them a fair open trial. After World War II Stalin and Churchhill just wanted to kill the nazi criminals without any trial. It was Roosevelt who said if we do that, we have sunk down to the same level as the nazis and he said they must be given a fair trial. Roosevelt was right and we need to do the same now regarding terrorists.

[Hardrock69]

Yup. Give them a fair trial, then take 'em out and shoot 'em. :hee:

[BigBadBrian]

Big Bad Brucie WISHES it applied to US Citizens. He has probably been goose-stepping around the house since the bill was first introduced.

Listen Faggot, don't assume your under-performing, 5th Grade, Jethro Bodine, Hillbilly intellect knows what I wish...it doesn't.

You're just mad because you didn't take the time to read the bill...as usual, it was too complicated for you.

On the other hand, I'll actually agree with Nick. We have enough government agencies and operatives to do the job without getting the military involved.

[Hardrock69]

Shut up, fascist pig motherfucker.

[Hardrock69]

I'm sorry Brian. I should not abuse you so.

I only wish you would find your liberal, tree-hugging, Spammy Gaygar-loving self, and run free!

Be fwee, widdul Bwian!

BE FWEE!!!

:hee:

By the way, *ahem* political crap aside, did you ever get a good recording rig set up? I recall you asking for opinions in the gear thread.

[Hardrock69]

Oh, and "hillbilly"? I will have yew no I was not borned and rayzed here in hillbilly-land, sir! :yo:

[Kristy]

You're just mad because you didn't take the time to read the bill...as usual, it was too complicated for you.

Exactly! So right again, Brian. Copy & pasting is way easier than reading. Golly! If only the rest of the world could be so neocon as you.

[Nickdfresh]

Posse Comatitus.

It's beyond that. It's turning a law enforcement function into the mode of counterinsurgency, a dark day for civil liberties and another victory for the very few and far-between actual terrorists...

[Hardrock69]

Exactly! So right again, Brian. Copy & pasting is way easier than reading. Golly! If only the rest of the world could be so neocon as you.


He is still upset because Nazi Germany was over before he got a chance to experience it. :hee:

[Hardrock69]

It's beyond that. It's turning a law enforcement function into the mode of counterinsurgency, a dark day for civil liberties and another victory for the very few and far-between actual terrorists...

Once 9/11 happened, and our rights began to be stripped away, the terrists experienced WINNING on a grand scale. As you said, this is just the latest WIN for them.

[Nickdfresh]

Listen Faggot, don't assume your under-performing, 5th Grade, Jethro Bodine, Hillbilly intellect knows what I wish...it doesn't.

You're just mad because you didn't take the time to read the bill...as usual, it was too complicated for you.

On the other hand, I'll actually agree with Nick. We have enough government agencies and operatives to do the job without getting the military involved.

Then stop voting for the chest-thumping, paranoid shithead reptilian brained moron politicians who actually support this grandstanding buffoonery mocking the Constitution they pretend to support when it suits their agenda...

[BigBadBrian]

Then stop voting for the chest-thumping, paranoid shithead reptilian brained moron politicians who actually support this grandstanding buffoonery mocking the Constitution they pretend to support when it suits their agenda...

Those who voted for S. 1867 in the Armed Services Committee
■Democrats:
Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut)
Jack Reed (Rhode Island)
Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii)
Ben Nelson (Nebraska)
Jim Webb (Virginia)
Claire McCaskill (Missouri)
Mark Udall (Colorado)
Kay R. Hagan (North Carolina)
Mark Begich (Alaska)
Joe Manchin III (West Virginia)
Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire)
Kirsten E. Gillibrand (New York)
Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut)

■Republicans:
James M. Inhofe (Oklahoma)
Jeff Sessions (Alabama)
Saxby Chambliss (Georgia)
Roger F. Wicker (Mississippi)
Scott P. Brown (Massachusetts)
Rob Portman (Ohio)
Kelly Ayotte (New Hampshire)
Susan M. Collins (Maine)
Lindsey Graham (South Carolina)
John Cornyn (Texas)
David Vitter (Louisiana)

These are the seven senators who voted against S1867:
■Thomas Coburn (R-Oklahoma)
■Thomas Harken (D-Iowa)
■Mike Lee (R-Utah)
■Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon)
■Rand Paul (R-Kentucky)
■Bernard Sanders (I-Vermont)
■Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)

[BigBadBrian]

Vote Details

Alabama
Yea AL Sessions, Jefferson [R]
Yea AL Shelby, Richard [R]
Alaska
Yea AK Begich, Mark [D]
Yea AK Murkowski, Lisa [R]
Arizona
Yea AZ Kyl, Jon [R]
Yea AZ McCain, John [R]
Arkansas
Yea AR Boozman, John [R]
Yea AR Pryor, Mark [D]
California
Yea CA Boxer, Barbara [D]
Yea CA Feinstein, Dianne [D]
Colorado
Yea CO Bennet, Michael [D]
Yea CO Udall, Mark [D]
Connecticut
Yea CT Blumenthal, Richard [D]
Yea CT Lieberman, Joseph [I]
Delaware
Yea DE Carper, Thomas [D]
Yea DE Coons, Chris [D]
Florida
Yea FL Nelson, Bill [D]
Yea FL Rubio, Marco [R]
Georgia
Yea GA Chambliss, Saxby [R]
Yea GA Isakson, John [R]
Hawaii
Yea HI Akaka, Daniel [D]
Yea HI Inouye, Daniel [D]
Idaho
Yea ID Crapo, Michael [R]
Yea ID Risch, James [R]
Illinois
Yea IL Durbin, Richard [D]
Yea IL Kirk, Mark [R]
Indiana
Yea IN Coats, Daniel [R]
Yea IN Lugar, Richard [R]
Iowa
Yea IA Grassley, Charles [R]
Nay IA Harkin, Thomas [D]
Kansas
Yea KS Moran, Jerry [R]
Yea KS Roberts, Pat [R]
Kentucky
Yea KY McConnell, Mitch [R]
Nay KY Paul, Rand [R]
Louisiana
Yea LA Landrieu, Mary [D]
Yea LA Vitter, David [R]
Maine
Yea ME Collins, Susan [R]
Yea ME Snowe, Olympia [R]
Maryland
Yea MD Cardin, Benjamin [D]
Yea MD Mikulski, Barbara [D]
Massachusetts
Yea MA Brown, Scott [R]
Yea MA Kerry, John [D]
Michigan
Yea MI Levin, Carl [D]
Yea MI Stabenow, Debbie Ann [D]
Minnesota
Yea MN Franken, Al [D]
Yea MN Klobuchar, Amy [D]
Mississippi
Yea MS Cochran, Thad [R]
Yea MS Wicker, Roger [R]
Missouri
Yea MO Blunt, Roy [R]
Yea MO McCaskill, Claire [D]
Montana
Yea MT Baucus, Max [D]
Yea MT Tester, Jon [D]
Nebraska
Yea NE Johanns, Mike [R]
Yea NE Nelson, Ben [D]
Nevada
Yea NV Heller, Dean [R]
Yea NV Reid, Harry [D]
New Hampshire
Yea NH Ayotte, Kelly [R]
Yea NH Shaheen, Jeanne [D]
New Jersey
Yea NJ Lautenberg, Frank [D]
Yea NJ Menendez, Robert [D]
New Mexico
Yea NM Bingaman, Jeff [D]
Yea NM Udall, Tom [D]
New York
Yea NY Gillibrand, Kirsten [D]
Yea NY Schumer, Charles [D]
North Carolina
Yea NC Burr, Richard [R]
Yea NC Hagan, Kay [D]
North Dakota
Yea ND Conrad, Kent [D]
Yea ND Hoeven, John [R]
Ohio
Yea OH Brown, Sherrod [D]
Yea OH Portman, Robert [R]
Oklahoma
Nay OK Coburn, Thomas [R]
Yea OK Inhofe, James [R]
Oregon
Nay OR Merkley, Jeff [D]
Nay OR Wyden, Ron [D]
Pennsylvania
Yea PA Casey, Robert [D]
Yea PA Toomey, Patrick [R]
Rhode Island
Yea RI Reed, John [D]
Yea RI Whitehouse, Sheldon [D]
South Carolina
Yea SC DeMint, Jim [R]
Yea SC Graham, Lindsey [R]
South Dakota
Yea SD Johnson, Tim [D]
Yea SD Thune, John [R]
Tennessee
Yea TN Alexander, Lamar [R]
Yea TN Corker, Bob [R]
Texas
Yea TX Cornyn, John [R]
Yea TX Hutchison, Kay [R]
Utah
Yea UT Hatch, Orrin [R]
Nay UT Lee, Mike [R]
Vermont
Yea VT Leahy, Patrick [D]
Nay VT Sanders, Bernard [I]
Virginia
Yea VA Warner, Mark [D]
Yea VA Webb, Jim [D]
Washington
Yea WA Cantwell, Maria [D]
Yea WA Murray, Patty [D]
West Virginia
Yea WV Manchin, Joe [D]
Yea WV Rockefeller, John [D]
Wisconsin
Yea WI Johnson, Ron [R]
Yea WI Kohl, Herbert [D]
Wyoming
Yea WY Barrasso, John [R]
Yea WY Enzi, Michael [R]

[ODShowtime]

They can already drug test you for no reason and pull you over for not wearing your seatbelt. It's already too late. We're dumb sheep just waiting in line outside the slaughterhouse. They're nice and they give us water some time.

That's why you live life according to the philosophy of the 6-Pack. Fuck it. Have fun. Get as much tail as possible before the party ends.

[Hardrock69]

Ok. So these people all voted to officially make our Government a Nazi police state.

So Brian, your point is? Fucking tool.

[Nitro Express]

Our next door neighbor was a holocaust survivor. Her dad was able to get them out of Germany and into Shanghai. Nobody wanted the Jewish refugees and Shanghai was one of the few places they could get visas. Then the Japanese occupied Shanghai. The one thing she told us kids is how fast things changed in Germany. She said her family went from being just a normal family to being fingered and hated practically overnight. She said don't think it can't happen here and don't think it would take a long time to happen.

[Nitro Express]

Yup. Give them a fair trial, then take 'em out and shoot 'em. :hee:

Fine. They have an open trial. They know what they are being charged with. Once they are proven guilty by a court of law then we can shoot them.

[Hardrock69]

Just got done reading Bill Graham's auto-biography. When the shit hit the fan in Berlin, one of his sisters went with a guy to Shanghai. She had a difficult time, but at least she got the fuck out before it really got bad. Bill's parents were not so lucky. His Mom died in a concentration kamp.

[Nickdfresh]

An excellent article courtesy of The NY Times. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us/beyond-guantanamo-bay-a-web-of-federal-prisons.html?_r=1&hp)


Aggressive prosecution strategy, aimed at prevention as much as punishment, has sent away scores of people
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/12/11/us/PRISON-6/PRISON-6-articleLarge.jpg
By SCOTT SHANE

WASHINGTON — It is the other Guantánamo, an archipelago of federal prisons that stretches across the country, hidden away on back roads. Today, it houses far more men convicted in terrorism cases than the shrunken population of the prison in Cuba that has generated so much debate.

An aggressive prosecution strategy, aimed at prevention as much as punishment, has sent away scores of people. They serve long sentences, often in restrictive, Muslim-majority units, under intensive monitoring by prison officers. Their world is spare.

Among them is Ismail Royer, serving 20 years for helping friends go to an extremist training camp in Pakistan. In a letter from the highest-security prison in the United States, Mr. Royer describes his remarkable neighbors at twice-a-week outdoor exercise sessions, each prisoner alone in his own wire cage under the Colorado sky. “That’s really the only interaction I have with other inmates,” he wrote from the federal Supermax, 100 miles south of Denver.

There is Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, Mr. Royer wrote. Terry Nichols, who conspired to blow up the Oklahoma City federal building. Ahmed Ressam, the would-be “millennium bomber,” who plotted to attack Los Angeles International Airport. And Eric Rudolph, who bombed abortion clinics and the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta.

In recent weeks, Congress has reignited an old debate, with some arguing that only military justice is appropriate for terrorist suspects. But military tribunals have proved excruciatingly slow and imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly — $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.

The criminal justice system, meanwhile, has absorbed the surge of terrorism cases since 2001 without calamity, and without the international criticism that Guantánamo has attracted for holding prisoners without trial. A decade after the Sept. 11 attacks, an examination of how the prisons have handled the challenge of extremist violence reveals some striking facts:

Big numbers. Today, 171 prisoners remain at Guantánamo. As of Oct. 1, the federal Bureau of Prisons reported that it was holding 362 people convicted in terrorism-related cases, 269 with what the bureau calls a connection to international terrorism — up from just 50 in 2000. An additional 93 inmates have a connection to domestic terrorism.
Lengthy sentences. Terrorists who plotted to massacre Americans are likely to die in prison. Faisal Shahzad, who tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square in 2010, is serving a sentence of life without parole at the Supermax, as are Zacarias Moussaoui, a Qaeda operative arrested in 2001, and Mr. Reid, the shoe bomber, among others. But many inmates whose conduct fell far short of outright terrorism are serving sentences of a decade or more, the result of a calculated prevention strategy to sideline radicals well before they could initiate deadly plots.
Special units. Since 2006, the Bureau of Prisons has moved many of those convicted in terrorism cases to two special units that severely restrict visits and phone calls. But in creating what are Muslim-dominated units, prison officials have inadvertently fostered a sense of solidarity and defiance, and set off a long-running legal dispute over limits on group prayer. Officials have warned in court filings about the danger of radicalization, but the Bureau of Prisons has nothing comparable to the deradicalization programs instituted in many countries.
Quiet releases. More than 300 prisoners have completed their sentences and been freed since 2001. Their convictions involved not outright violence but “material support” for a terrorist group; financial or document fraud; weapons violations; and a range of other crimes. About half are foreign citizens and were deported; the Americans have blended into communities around the country, refusing news media interviews and avoiding attention.
Rare recidivism. By contrast with the record at Guantánamo, where the Defense Department says that about 25 percent of those released are known or suspected of subsequently joining militant groups, it appears extraordinarily rare for the federal prison inmates with past terrorist ties to plot violence after their release. The government keeps a close eye on them: prison intelligence officers report regularly to the Justice Department on visitors, letters and phone calls of inmates linked to terrorism. Before the prisoners are freed, F.B.I. agents typically interview them, and probation officers track them for years.

Both the Obama administration and Republicans in Congress often cite the threat of homegrown terrorism. But the Bureau of Prisons has proven remarkably resistant to outside scrutiny of the inmates it houses, who might offer a unique window on the problem.

In 2009, a group of scholars proposed interviewing people imprisoned in terrorism cases about how they took that path. The Department of Homeland Security approved the proposal and offered financing. But the Bureau of Prisons refused to grant access, saying the project would require too much staff time.

“There’s a huge national debate about how dangerous these people are,” said Gary LaFree, director of a national terrorism study center at the University of Maryland, who was lead author of the proposal. “I just think, as a citizen, somebody ought to be studying this.”

The Bureau of Prisons would not make any officials available for an interview with The New York Times, and wardens at three prisons refused to permit a reporter to visit inmates. But e-mails and letters from inmates give a rare, if narrow, look at their hidden world.

Paying the Price
Consider the case of Randall Todd Royer, 38, a Missouri-born Muslim convert who goes by Ismail. Before 9/11, he was a young Islamic activist with the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim American Society, meeting with members of Congress and visiting the Clinton White House.

Today he is nearly eight years into a 20-year prison sentence. He pleaded guilty in 2004 to helping several American friends go to a training camp for Lashkar-e-Taiba, an extremist group fighting Indian rule in Kashmir. The organization was later designated a terrorist group by the United States — and is blamed for the Mumbai massacre in 2008 — but prosecutors maintained in 2004 that the friends intended to go on to Afghanistan and fight American troops alongside the Taliban.

Mr. Royer had fought briefly with the Bosnian Muslims against their Serbian neighbors in the mid-1990s, when NATO, too, backed the Bosnians. He trained at a Lashkar-e-Taiba camp himself. And in 2001, he was stopped by Virginia police with an AK-47 and ammunition in his car.

But he adamantly denies that he would ever scheme to kill Americans, and there is no evidence that he did so. Before sentencing, he wrote the judge a 30-page letter admitting, “I crossed the line and, in my ignorance and phenomenally poor judgment, broke the law.” In grand jury testimony, he expressed regret about not objecting during a meeting, just after the Sept. 11 attacks, in which his friends discussed joining the Taliban.

“Unfortunately, I didn’t come out and clearly say that’s not what any of us should be about,” he said.

Prosecutors call Mr. Royer “an inveterate liar“ in court papers in another case, asserting that he has given contradictory accounts of the meeting after Sept. 11. Mr. Royer says he has been truthful.
Story: Al-Qaida down, but other Pakistani terrorists a threat

Whatever the facts, he is paying the price. His 20-year sentence was the statutory minimum under a 2004 plea deal he reluctantly took, fearing that a trial might end in a life term. His wife divorced him and remarried; he has seen his four young children only through glass since 2006, when the Bureau of Prisons moved him to a restrictive new unit in Indiana for inmates with the terrorism label. After an altercation with another inmate who he said was bullying others, he was moved in 2010 to the Supermax in Colorado.

He is barred from using e-mail and permitted only three 15-minute phone calls a month — recently increased from two, a move that Mr. Royer hopes may portend his being moved to a prison closer to his children. His letters are reflective, sometimes self-critical, frequently dropping allusions to his omnivorous reading. His flirtation with violent Islam and his incarceration, he says, have not poisoned him against his own country.

“You asked what I think of the U.S.; that is an extraordinarily complex question,” Mr. Royer wrote in one letter consisting of 27 pages of neat handwriting. “I can say I was born in Missouri, I love that land and its people, I love the Mississippi, I love my family and my cousins, I love my Germanic ethnic heritage and people, I love the English language, I love the American people — my people.

“He said he believed some American foreign policy positions had been “needlessly antagonistic” but added, “Nothing the U.S. did justified the 9/11 attacks.”

Mr. Royer rejected the notion that the United States was at war with Islam. “Conflict between the U.S. and Muslims is neither inevitable nor beneficial or in anyone’s interest,” he wrote. “Actually, I suppose it is in the interest of fanatics on both sides, but their interests run counter to everyone else’s.” He added an erudite footnote: “ ‘Les extrémités se touchent’ (the extremes meet) — Blaise Pascal.”

He expressed frustration that the Bureau of Prisons appears to view him as an extremist, despite what he describes as his campaign against extremism in discussions with other inmates and prison sermons at Friday Prayer, “which they surely have recordings of.”

“I have gotten into vehement debates, not to mention civil conversations, with other inmates from the day I was arrested until today, about the dangers and evils of extremism and terrorism,” Mr. Royer wrote in a yearlong correspondence with a reporter. “Can they not figure out who I am?”

A scorched-earth approach
In 2004, prosecutors believed they knew who Mr. Royer was: one of a group of young Virginians under the influence of a radical cleric, Ali al-Timimi, whose members played paintball to practice for jihad and were on a path toward extremist violence. After Sept. 11, federal prosecutors took a scorched-earth approach to any crime with even a hint of a terrorism connection, and judges and juries went along.

In the Virginia jihad case, for instance, prosecutors used the Neutrality Act, a little-used law dating to 1794 that prohibits Americans from fighting against a nation at peace with the United States. Prosecutors combined that law with weapons statutes that impose a mandatory minimum sentence in a strategy to get the longest prison terms, with breaks for some defendants who cooperated, said Paul J. McNulty, then the United States attorney overseeing the case.

“We were doing all we could to prevent the next attack,” Mr. McNulty said.

“It was a deterrence strategy and a show of strength,” said Karen J. Greenberg, a law professor at Fordham University who has overseen the most thorough independent analysis of terrorism prosecutions. “The attitude of the government was: Every step you take toward terrorism, no matter how small, will be punished severely.”

About 40 percent of terrorism cases since the Sept. 11 attacks have relied on informants, by the count of the Center on Law and Security at New York University, which Ms. Greenberg headed until earlier this year. In such cases, the F.B.I. has trolled for radicals and then tested whether they were willing to plot mayhem — again, a pre-emptive strategy intended to ferret out potential terrorists. But in some cases prosecutors have been accused of overreaching.

Yassin M. Aref, for instance, was a Kurdish immigrant from Iraq and the imam of an Albany mosque when he agreed to serve as witness to a loan between an acquaintance and another man, actually an informant posing as a supporter of a Pakistani terrorist group, Jaish-e-Muhammad. The ostensible purpose of the loan was to buy a missile to kill the Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations. Mr. Aref’s involvement was peripheral — but he was convicted of conspiring to aid a terrorist group and got a 15-year sentence.

That was a typical punishment, according to the Center on Law and Security, which has studied the issue. Of 204 people charged with what it calls serious jihadist crimes since the Sept. 11 attacks, 87 percent were convicted and got an average sentence of 14 years, according to a September report from the center.

Federal officials say the government’s zero-tolerance approach to any conduct touching on terrorism is an important reason there has been no repeat of Sept. 11. Lengthy sentences for marginal offenders have been criticized by some rights advocates as deeply unfair — but they have sent an unmistakable message to young men drawn to the rhetoric of violent jihad.

The strategy has also sent scores of Muslim men to federal prisons.

Special units
After news reports in 2006 that three men imprisoned in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing had sent letters to a Spanish terrorist cell, the Bureau of Prisons created two special wards, called Communication Management Units, or C.M.U.’s. The units, which opened at federal prisons in Terre Haute, Ind., in 2006 and Marion, Ill., in 2008, have set off litigation and controversy, chiefly because critics say they impose especially restrictive rules on Muslim inmates, who are in the majority.

“The C.M.U.’s? You mean the Muslim Management Units?” said Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The units currently hold about 80 inmates. The rules for visitors — who are allowed no physical contact with inmates — and the strict monitoring of mail, e-mail and phone calls are intended both to prevent inmates from radicalizing others and to rule out plotting from behind bars.

A Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman, Traci L. Billingsley, said in an e-mail that the units were not created for any religious group but were “necessary to ensure the safety, security and orderly operation of correctional facilities, and protection of the public.”

An unintended consequence of creating the C.M.U.’s is a continuing conflict between Muslim inmates and guards, mainly over the inmates’ demand for collective prayer beyond the authorized hourlong group prayer on Fridays. The clash is described in hundreds of pages of court filings in a lawsuit. In one affidavit, a prison official in Terre Haute describes “signs of radicalization” in the unit, saying one inmate’s language showed “defiance to authority, and a sense of being incarcerated because of Islam.”

One 2010 written protest obtained by The New York Times, listing grievances ranging from the no-contact visiting rules to guards “mocking, disrespecting and disrupting” Friday Prayer, was signed by 17 Muslim prisoners in the Terre Haute Communication Management Unit. They included members of the so-called Virginia jihad case of which Mr. Royer was part; the Lackawanna Six, Buffalo-area Yemeni Americans who traveled to a Qaeda camp in Afghanistan; Kevin James, who formed a radical Muslim group in prison and plotted to attack military facilities in Los Angeles; and John Walker Lindh, the so-called American Taliban.

An affidavit signed by Mr. Lindh, who is serving 20 years after admitting to fighting for the Taliban, complained that a correctional officer greeted male Muslim inmates with “Good morning, ladies.” (“No ladies were in the area,” Mr. Lindh writes.) Prison officials say in court papers that Mr. Lindh has repeatedly challenged guards and violated rules.

Unlike those at the Supermax, inmates in the segregated units have access to e-mail, and some were willing to answer questions. Mr. Lindh, whose father, Frank Lindh, said his son believed the news media falsely labeled him a terrorist, was not. In reply to a reporter’s letter requesting an interview, he sent only a photocopy of the sole of a tennis shoe. Since shoe bottoms are considered offensive in many cultures, his answer appeared to be an emphatic no.

There is some evidence that the Bureau of Prisons has assigned Muslims with no clear terrorist connection to the C.M.U.’s. Avon Twitty, a Muslim who spent 27 years in prison for a 1982 street murder, was sent to the Terre Haute unit in 2007. When he challenged the assignment, he was told in writing that he was a “member of an international terrorist organization,” though no organization was named and there appears to be no public evidence for the assertion.

Mr. Twitty, working for a home improvement company and teaching at a Washington mosque since his release in January, said he believed the real reason was to quash his complaints about what he believed were miscalculations of time off for good behavior for numerous inmates. “They had to shut me up,” he said.

Another former inmate at the Marion C.M.U., Andy Stepanian, an animal rights activist, said a guard once told him he was “a balancer” — a non-Muslim placed in the unit to rebut claims of religious bias. Mr. Stepanian said the creation of the predominantly Muslim units could backfire, adding to the feeling that Islam is under attack.

“I think it’s a fair assessment that these men will leave with a more intensified belief that the U.S. is at war with Islam,” said Mr. Stepanian, 33, who now works for a Princeton publisher. “The place reeked of it,” he said, describing clashes over restrictions on prayer and some guards’ hostility to Islam.

Yet Mr. Stepanian also said he found the “family atmosphere” and camaraderie of inmates at the unit a welcome change from the threatening tone of his previous medium-security prison, where he said prisoners without a gang to protect them were “food for the sharks.” When he arrived at the C.M.U., he said, he found on his bed a pair of shower slippers and a bag of non-animal-based food that Muslim inmates had collected after hearing a vegan was joining the unit.

He was wary. “I thought they were trying to indoctrinate me,” he said. “They never tried.” The consensus of the inmates, he said, “was that 9/11 was not Islam.” “These guys were not lunatics,” he said. “They wanted to be back with their families.”

Reflection
It may be too early to judge recidivism for those imprisoned in terrorism cases after Sept. 11; those who are already out are mostly defendants whose crimes were less serious or who cooperated with the authorities. Justice Department officials and outside experts could identify only a handful of cases in which released inmates had been rearrested, a rate of relapse far below that for most federal inmates or for Guantánamo releases.

For example, Mohammed Mansour Jabarah, a Kuwaiti Canadian who plotted with Al Qaeda to attack American embassies in Singapore and Manila, pleaded guilty in 2002 and began to work as an F.B.I. informant. But F.B.I. agents soon discovered he was secretly plotting to kill them — and he was sentenced to life in prison.

Nearly all of these ex-convicts, however, lie low and steer clear of militancy, often under the watchful eye of family, mosque and community, lawyers and advocates say. A dozen former inmates declined to be interviewed, saying that to be associated publicly with a terrorism case could derail new jobs and lives. As for Mr. Royer, he is approaching only the midpoint of his 20-year sentence.

Did he get what he deserved? Chris Heffelfinger, a terrorism analyst and author of “Radical Islam in America,” did a detailed study of the Virginia jihad case, and concluded that Mr. Royer’s sentence was perhaps double what his crime merited. But he said the prosecution was warranted and probably prevented at least some of the men Mr. Royer assisted from joining the Taliban.

“I think a strong law enforcement response to cases like this is appropriate nine times out of 10,” Mr. Heffelfinger said. Mr. Royer himself, in his long presentencing letter to Judge Leonie M. Brinkema, said he understood why he had been arrested. “I realize that the government has a legitimate interest in protecting the public from terrorism,” he wrote, “and that in this post-9/11 environment, it must take all reasonable precautions.”

Today, Mr. Royer’s only battle is to serve out his sentence in a less restrictive prison nearer his children. In what he called in a letter “a heroic sacrifice,” his parents, Ray and Nancy Royer, moved from Missouri to Virginia to be close to their son’s children, now aged 8 to 12.

“I found it necessary to be a surrogate father,” said Ray Royer, 70, a commercial photographer by trade, in an interview at the retirement community outside Washington where he and his wife now live. When his son, who still goes by Randy in the family, converted to Islam at the age of 18, his parents did not object. Later, when he headed to Bosnia, they chalked it up to his active social conscience. “Religion is a personal thing,” the elder Mr. Royer said. “He’d never been in trouble.”
Advertise | AdChoices

Ray Royer was at his son’s Virginia apartment in 2003 when the F.B.I. knocked at 5 a.m., put him in handcuffs and took him away. Now, years later, he alternates between defending his son and expressing dismay at what Randy got himself into.

“He did help his buddies get to L.E.T.,” or Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistani militant group later designated as a terrorist organization. “He admitted to it. He should pay the price.” Still, he added, “maybe he deserved five years or so. Not 20.”

Ray Royer sat at his home computer one recent evening, looking through a folder called “Randy Pics” — photographs tracing his son’s life from childhood, to fatherhood, to prison.

“He loved his family,” the father said of his son. “Why would he put this cause ahead of his family? I still don’t really know what happened. I’m still trying to figure it out.”

This article, "Beyond Guantánamo, a Web of Prisons for Terrorism Inmates," originally appeared in The New York Times.