Tag Archives: patriot act

U.S.

Occupy America, World War 3: U.S. Congress about to make your backyard the next War Zone; National Defense Authorization Act will make the Patriot Act look like a joke. Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate against the bill

“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.”-Chris Anders, American Civil Liberties Union

Two U.S. Senators came up with what is probably the greatest threat to our Constitutional freedoms, section 1031 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (S.1253.RS).  Those Senators are Carl Levin of Michigan, and John McCain of Arizona (I guess McCain’s time as a POW in Vietnam destroyed the concept of American freedom in his mind).

Section 1031 of the bill would “…basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield…”-Lindsey Graham, U.S. Senator from South Carolina, and supporter of the bill

“America is part of the battlefield.”-Kelly Ayotte, U.S. Senator from New Hampshire, and supporter of the bill

(Note: I’m not sure if the above quotes were actually stated by those Senators.  I found one site that attributed the quotes as actually coming from an ACLU publication.  In the short time I spent trying to confirm the quotes I was not able to find anything directly linking them.  But they do support the bill.)

“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.”-Mark Udall, U.S. Senator from Colorado, who opposes the bill

The bill already passed the House of Representatives back in May. Ron Paul was one of five House Republicans who opposed it:  “I have a personal belief that you never have to give up liberty for security. You can still provide security without sacrificing our Bill of Rights. You can prevent crimes by becoming a police state . . . So if you advocate the police state, yes, you can have safety and security and you might prevent a crime, but the crime then will be against the American people and against our freedoms.”

It would “…permit the federal government to indefinitely detain American citizens on American soil, without charge or trial, at the discretion of the president.”-Justin Amash, U.S. Representative from Michigan, one of five House Republicans who voted against the bill

Section 1031 states: “The Armed Forces of the United States are authorized to detain covered persons captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force…”

The Authorization for Use of Military Force was approved under the Bush Jr administration on September 18, 2001.  It specifically says that the President is authorized to take any action “he” feels is necessary to capture those who plotted the 9/11 attacks, and “…to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States…”

This is where critics of S.1253.RS section 1031 say the military could be used on U.S. soil to go after U.S. citizens.  S.1253.RS section 1031 would allow the President to use the military within the United States, if the President felt it necessary to do so, in fulfilling the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.

S.1253.RS section 1031 also says: “Long-term detention under the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities against the nations, organizations, and persons subject to the Authorization for Use of Military Force.” This is where critics of the bill say you could be held in military prisons indefinitely.

However, the section 1031 does not allow the wanton detention of U.S. citizens: “The authority to detain a person under this section does not extend to the detention of citizens or lawful resident aliens of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.”

That part is tricky. Basically you’d have to be found in violation of, or simply suspected of violating U.S. laws to be detained by military forces.  This is where critics say the military could be used as a police force. That’s the sinister part of section 1031, and it’s related sections under Subtitle D – – Detainee Matters, of S.1253.RS: It does not require that you be charged with a crime, let alone being convicted in a court trial, nor does it require any substantial evidence to justify your detention.

The other problem is that section 1031 says detention will last “…until the end of hostilities…” When you’re fighting an open ended, vague War on Terror, how the freak do you know when it’s finished?  Take some political science courses on terrorism and you’ll realize that as long as people get ripped off by the establishment (whether they actually do get ripped off, or it’s just in their minds) there will always be acts of “terror”. 

President Barack Obama claims he will veto the bill if it passes the Senate.  However, there are fears that if someone like Newt Gingrich becomes President in 2012, then the bill would become law.