The National Defense Authorization Act

Defense Authorization Act, which basically allows the military to act on American soil and indefinitely incarcerate whomsoever they deem is an enemy combatant. If members of Congress choose — for the first time in our nation's history — to codify a system of indefinite detention without charge and authorize such confinement on the basis of suspicion alone, they will do so with their eyes wide open.

edited 14th Dec '11 12:48:21 AM by Serocco

This thread has been done twice already. Sorry.

Oh, really? What are they called, and which was closed?

Right, we don't need three threads. Let's go with this one; at least the OP has some some info. I've given it a more neutral and (hopefully) easier-to-find title. Locked the other two.

edited 14th Dec '11 2:32:36 AM by Camacan

Soon:

Arabic Spring spreads to Russia, USA, China?

With this insanity I think the US has lost about any credibility it still had after Iraq/Afghanistan.

The superpowers won't have exactly the same thing as the Arab Spring, but I am starting to doubt OWS's chances of success.

As we theorized in the other thread, I think this is actually a ham-fisted attempt to sneak in harsher immigration laws...

I approve of its spreading. It means I can kill bad people and get away with it, too. Just like we should ALL be able to if we're truly free beings.

Save it for the conspiracy theory boards.

Why should I?! We're all going to become slaves at this rate, unless everyone gets off their asses who is affected by this and fights back...

Could you at least explain TO ME what's so "conspiracy theorist" about the cold hard truth I know for a fact this act of fascism will cause?

edited 14th Dec '11 5:18:46 AM by LostAnarchist

So who decides who's bad enough to just kill? Do we just kill everyone to be thorough?

QFT.

By the end, everyone will be dead...

Unless that is what you want, lostie?

edited 14th Dec '11 6:47:20 AM by Greenmantle

I support this plan, with the addition that I get to be on a death squad.{sarcasm, or dark humor, you decide}

I'm fairly sure Anarchist's first post was supposed to be read as sarcasm, and that you people have been arguing the same thing. But I might just not get it like you.

Also, shame on you USAF, it is never okay to openly mock someone's beliefs. Nor is it anything but shameful to display this level of anger on what is supposed to be a peaceful discussion. If you want to go fight, go post on the fox website.

@Lost,

Because it adds nothing substantial to the conversation.

Pfft. "This level of anger?" I'm not the advocating acts of terrorism and revolution (or failing to grasp what "fascist" means).

Anyways, re: the topic - I'm not sure if it will actually be enforceable in the practical sense. What's gonna happen if say, a government executive actually orders some of the stuff this hypothetically allows?

Oh for fucks sake. THIS ISN'T WHAT THE BILL DOES.

Here is the text of the bill.

The relevant parts are at the bottom of page 426, you're looking for Subtitle D, sec. 1031 and 1032.

Sec. 1031 SPECIFICALLY SAYS:

And, Sec. 1032 SPECIFICALLY SAYS:

If people would fucking do a little fact checking before jumping to conclusions, we probably wouldn't have half the problems that we have now in politics.

edited 14th Dec '11 7:44:33 AM by DrunkGirlfriend

There are conflicting reports about different sections of the law, and about how the law passed was amended. In either case, even if true - it's an important distinction, but the thought that the US military can arbitrarily detain anybody on US soil, even if it's "just" illegals - isn't that rather crass? Isn't that rather horrible? One does have to wonder what the next step is...

To be precise, it is a measure you'd expect from a country like North Korea or some other sort of backwater dictature. To come from the so-called "leader of the free world" sounds like some bad parody, but if serious is freaking scary.

@ Lost Anarchist: FFS, suggesting to use revolutions as a means to get away with murder is about as depraved as incarcerating people for life without any chance of a trial.

edited 14th Dec '11 12:12:08 PM by TheStupidExclamationMark

I'm not a mod, but I'm the original poster, so I'd appreciate it if you kept the arguments to a minimun and focus on these next questions:

Who proposed the bill? Who supports the bill? Will Obama issue a veto? What else is in the bill?

McCain is one of the cosponsors. It's supported by damn near everyone, because it's the military budget and you can't touch that. Obama wants to strip out this part of it, though.

Strip out the part that includes the military budget?

Strip out the part that says he can't detain US citizens...

No, the part that could cause problems with arbitrary detention.

Basically, it has an absurd (97-3 in the Senate, I think) support rate, because it's the military budget; most of the time, this is just one of those routine bills nobody opposes, and which nobody reads.

Which is why the Republicans tried to sneak this in, methinks...

I hope to God Almighty that bill doesn't pass, or, at the very least, gets revamped so that it isn't as horrific. What are the chances of that?

The Republicans, are trying to give a Democrat President, the ability to use the military to detain, or assassinate, anyone(who isn't a US citizen) suspected of terrorism...

And they had to "sneak" it in?... Right.

Actually, it includes citizens as targets for indefinite detentions.