Bill Would Allow Detention US Citizens Indefinitely

[Noir]

Crazy bill is crazy.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/bcKw_MOKAyE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[fj1200]

Not so fast...

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien 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.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1715311/pg1

[revelarts]

Ok folks do we see what's happening here. How blatant does it have to get?

1st they came for the foreign terrorist overseas
then they came for the American terrorist overseas
then they came for the Terrorist in the U.S....

Where the posse comitatus, well Bush gutted that yearsss ago , for our own good and safety.
Where's the Bill of rights. That "suicide pack"? fugitaboutit the Presedent and his secret council knows who to put in jail without trial and Con will Shoot them in the head if told and be happy about.

lets add this lil bit of news.
it's not the congress but a DOD manual's test that described protest as "LOW LEVEL TERRORISM" which would make tea party protesters "low level terrorist" even if they keep the street clean and jump at every illegal order of a cop.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,527181,00.html

...the question and answer choices were obviously deliberately designed to lead the exam taker/DoD employee to choose “Protests” as an example of “low-level terrorism” inasmuch as the other answer choices are all obviously not low-level acts. All of the others are very violent attacks. Finally, as I pointed out in my article, the term “low-level terrorism” appears to be a “term of art” within security agency circles given that a scholarly paper delivered in February of 2009 at an international conference incorporated it into its title as such:
“Vinthagen, Stellan. ‘Labeling “Low Level Terrorism:” The Out-Definition of Social Movements’ Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA's 50th ANNUAL CONVENTION ‘EXPLORING THE PAST, ANTICIPATING THE FUTURE’ New York Marriott Marquis, NEW YORK CITY, NY, USA, Feb 15, 2009.
“Abstract: This paper explores current state security tendency to label ordinary protests and opposition as "low level terrorism" or social movements as "terrorist environments" and the political and democratic consequences of such a politics of fear. The judic [the abstract cuts off here.]”
The problem at its heart, in other words, is that this particular question in the DoD training exam is merely a glaring individual example of a larger trend and mentality – the criminalization of protest and dissent and its relegation to a category of “terrorism,” legitimating the repression of dissent and free speech and assembly,...

http://open.salon.com/blog/dennis_loo/2009/06/22/dod_deletes_protest_terrorism_problems_remain

How many excuses can we give for this creeping police state. I know a lot of cops, and soldiers don't agree with it but it is becoming the law, are they willing to take their disagreement to the point of disobeying the law? I hope to God they do. the idiot congress and president haven't seen a police state regulation that doesn't seem "reasonable" or "necessary" to them.

[revelarts]

Not so fast...

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1715311/pg1
the patroit act has provisions that are suppose to restrict it's use as well but somehow it doesn't. And it has been used to do thngs it was supossedly never inteneded.

but if you that that line is going to save you then well, Ok sure. lets hope.

[jimnyc]

People continually bitch and moan about these tactics and restriction, ever since the Patriot Act was passed. I stated it back then and I'll repeat myself - if you aren't a terrorist you have nothing to worry about. Years have went by since my initial statement. Where is the line of people that have been violated that are 100% innocent?

Rev, you make it sound as if they are now coming for every day folks. Wan't happening back then and it isn't happening now. Whine and scream all you like but it doesn't change the facts. If you guys are going to go nuts and lose sleep over tactics aimed at terrorists, so be it.

Similar to claiming the newly found powers to declare war on foreign countries without congressional approval, only to find out we've done that like forever.

[Noir]

People continually bitch and moan about these tactics and restriction, ever since the Patriot Act was passed. I stated it back then and I'll repeat myself - if you aren't a terrorist you have nothing to worry about. Years have went by since my initial statement. Where is the line of people that have been violated that are 100% innocent?

Rev, you make it sound as if they are now coming for every day folks. Wan't happening back then and it isn't happening now. Whine and scream all you like but it doesn't change the facts. If you guys are going to go nuts and lose sleep over tactics aimed at terrorists, so be it.

Similar to claiming the newly found powers to declare war on foreign countries without congressional approval, only to find out we've done that like forever.

If i remember right there were 15 british men who got compensation from our government because we handed them over to the states to be sent to gitmo (of course without due process) and they were tortured while there and have since been released. No charges.

But hey, they had nothing to be worried about, because they were innocent, right?

[ConHog]

Ok folks do we see what's happening here. How blatant does it have to get?

1st they came for the foreign terrorist overseas
then they came for the American terrorist overseas
then they came for the Terrorist in the U.S....

Where the posse comitatus, well Bush gutted that yearsss ago , for our own good and safety.
Where's the Bill of rights. That "suicide pack"? fugitaboutit the Presedent and his secret council knows who to put in jail without trial and Con will Shoot them in the head if told and be happy about.

lets add this lil bit of news.
it's not the congress but a DOD manual's test that described protest as "LOW LEVEL TERRORISM" which would make tea party protesters "low level terrorist" even if they keep the street clean and jump at every illegal order of a cop.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,527181,00.html
http://open.salon.com/blog/dennis_loo/2009/06/22/dod_deletes_protest_terrorism_problems_remain

How many excuses can we give for this creeping police state. I know a lot of cops, and soldiers don't agree with it but it is becoming the law, are they willing to take their disagreement to the point of disobeying the law? I hope to God they do. the idiot congress and president haven't seen a police state regulation that doesn't seem "reasonable" or "necessary" to them.

I suggest that you don't even know Posse Comitatus allows and doesn't allow.

In a nutshell it makes it illegal for the US military (excepting the national guard and the coast guard) under federal authority to act as a police force within US borders. It doesn't prevent ANYTHING more.

[jimnyc]

If i remember right there were 15 british men who got compensation from our government because we handed them over to the states to be sent to gitmo (of course without due process) and they were tortured while there and have since been released. No charges.

But hey, they had nothing to be worried about, because they were innocent, right?

Link to official stories? The one line you put here makes it sound like the Brits fucked up and the Brits paid these men. I'll wait on the story for proof of what the Americans did and how they illegally did anything...

[ConHog]

Link to official stories? The one line you put here makes it sound like the Brits fucked up and the Brits paid these men. I'll wait on the story for proof of what the Americans did and how they illegally did anything...

No shit, the Brits hand some guys over and tell us they have intel we need and somehow its our fault for presumably finding out that the Brits were wrong and sending them home?

[Noir]

No shit, the Brits hand some guys over and tell us they have intel we need and somehow its our fault for presumably finding out that the Brits were wrong and sending them home?

No it was the Brit governments fault for Hanson them over when there was no charges aginst them and reason to believe they'd be tortured.

@Jim, I'll look for the links when I get home

[ConHog]

No it was the Brit governments fault for Hanson them over when there was no charges aginst them and reason to believe they'd be tortured.

@Jim, I'll look for the links when I get home

If by tortured you are referring to waterboarded. yes that IS torture, but it's not quite correct to say they were tortured as if we held hot irons to their feet. Hell, I doubt they were even waterboarded anyway, probably just talked to in a mean voice.

[fj1200]

If i remember right there were 15 british men who got compensation from our government because we handed them over to the states to be sent to gitmo (of course without due process) and they were tortured while there and have since been released. No charges.

But hey, they had nothing to be worried about, because they were innocent, right?

They're not entitled to due process.

[Noir]

If by tortured you are referring to waterboarded. yes that IS torture, but it's not quite correct to say they were tortured as if we held hot irons to their feet. Hell, I doubt they were even waterboarded anyway, probably just talked to in a mean voice.

IIRC (again going from memory) some of them were held 'just incase'...

[revelarts]

Good ol Jim always give the gov't the benny of the doubt ...


“The first person convicted under the PATRIOT Act was Mohamed Hussein, a 33-year-old Somali native who ran a money-forwarding service out of Boston. Though Hussein was convicted merely for not having a state license, federal prosecutors sought a harsh sentence. Federal Judge Robert Keeton was outraged: ‘You’re trying to ask me to sentence him as a terrorist. It shocks my conscience that I would even be asked to do that.’”..
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0706c.asp


In-flight confrontations can lead to terrorism charges
At least 200 passengers have been convicted of felonies under the Patriot Act, often for behavior involving raised voices and profanity. Some experts say airlines are misusing the law.OKLAHOMA CITY AND LOS ANGELES—
Tamera Jo Freeman was on a Frontier Airlines (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/frontier-airlines-inc.-ORCRP006215.topic) flight to Denver in 2007 when her two children began to quarrel over the window shade and then spilled a Bloody Mary into her lap.

She spanked each of them on the thigh with three swats. It was a small incident, but one that in the heightened anxiety after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks would eventually have enormous ramifications for Freeman and her children.



A flight attendant confronted Freeman, who responded by hurling a few profanities and throwing what remained of a can of tomato juice on the floor.

The incident aboard the Frontier flight ultimately led to Freeman's arrest and conviction for a federal felony defined as an act of terrorism under the Patriot Act, the controversial federal law enacted after the 2001 attacks in New York and Washington...
http://www.latimes.com/la-na-airline-felonies20-2009jan20,0,5183005.story



...PALO ALTO, California (Reuters) -- A federal prosecutor has alleged eBay Inc. unit PayPal violated a 2001 anti-terror law aimed at fighting money laundering when it provided payment services to online gambling companies, the Web auctioneer said in its annual report filed Monday.

Silicon Valley-based eBay said it received a letter Friday in which the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri accused PayPal of violating a provision of the USA Patriot Act.
The provision prohibits the transmission of funds that are known to have been derived from a criminal offense, or are intended to be used to promote or support unlawful activity.
The prosecutor also said the company could be forced to forfeit the money it received in connection with the alleged illegal activity and that it could also be criminally liable. ...


http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/04/01/ebay.paypal.reut/index.html



In the debate over the PATRIOT Act, the Bush White House insisted it needed the authority to search people's homes without their permission or knowledge so that terrorists wouldn't be tipped off that they're under investigation.
Now that the authority is law, how has the Department of Justice used the new power? To go after drug dealers.
Only three of the 763 "sneak-and-peek" requests in fiscal year 2008 involved terrorism cases, according to a July 2009 report (http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/SneakAndPeakReport.pdf) from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Sixty-five percent were drug cases.
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) quizzed Assistant Attorney General David Kris about the discrepancy at a hearing on the PATRIOT Act Wednesday. One might expect Kris to argue that there is a connection between drug trafficking and terrorism or that the administration is otherwise justified to use the authority by virtue of some other connection to terrorism.
He didn't even try. "This authority here on the sneak-and-peek side, on the criminal side, is not meant for intelligence. It's for criminal cases. So I guess it's not surprising to me that it applies in drug cases," Kris said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/watch-doj-official-blows_n_296209.html
you tube here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPVm6CZXOyc&feature=related

Not used for the intended purposes BUT it's OK BY JIM they just Violoated the law to catch bad guys, no terrorist or "low level terrorist" just evil drug dealers. that's a war too. WAR ON DRuuuugs Baby! We're winning that to. another surge and it smells like ...snif... victory yeah that's victory were smelling in the air this morning.


....a FOIA request (https://www.eff.org/foia/foia-records-patriot-act-use-and-misuse) for records of intelligence violations stemming from the FBI's use of the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act. In the FBI's response to our request, we uncovered evidence of multiple reports of potential violations (https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/patriot_records/PIOB%20Matters-3.pdf) (pdf); however, in typical FBI fashion (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/12/fbi-arbitrarily-covers-evidence-misconduct), the reports are almost entirely redacted. As a result, the details of most of the violations remain secret. Nevertheless, by comparing the FBI's response to our PATRIOT Act request with the Bureau's response to another EFF FOIA request (https://www.eff.org/foia/intelligence-agencies-misconduct), the murky details of at least one potential violation involving PATRIOT provisions became more clear: the FBI, in a case where use of a "John Doe" roving wiretap was authorized, monitored the conversations of "young children" for "approximately" five days...https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/03/documents-obtained-eff-reveal-fbi-patriot-act


In March 2007, the Justice Department’s Inspector General revealed that FBI agents had sent a flurry of fake emergency letters to phone companies, asking them to turn over phone records immediately by promising that the proper papers had been filed with U.S. attorneys, though in many cases this was a complete lie. More than 60 of these letters were made public today as part of a FBI document dump in response to a government sunshine lawsuit (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/06/judge_orders_fb.html) centered on the FBI’s abuse of a key Patriot Act power...Mefford was no rookie FBI agent. Mefford was the Executive Assistant Director, in charge of the Counterterrorism/Counterintelligence Division. In English, that means he was in charge of preventing another terrorist attack domestically..
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/07/fbi-patriot-act/

And the secrecy provisions don't even allow us to find out what going on in many cases.
How far does it have to go, But I've point other problems out before a few years ago in a list so long some told me to back off. but somehow you've managed to forget that list and revert to you default postion , "the gov't is always right... except when it makes a lil mistake". Jim it's time to wake up buddy.

[fj1200]

the patroit act has provisions that are suppose to restrict it's use as well but somehow it doesn't. And it has been used to do thngs it was supossedly never inteneded.

but if you that that line is going to save you then well, Ok sure. lets hope.

You mean there's mission creep and governmental encroachment? :link: :laugh:

Eternal vigilance is always necessary rev.

[revelarts]

...In the debate over the scope of the government’s authority to wiretap Americanswe often hear people say, “if you’re not doing something wrong you have nothing to worry about.” I am here to tell you that even the innocent can have their lives turned upside-down when laws designed to protect against unrestrained government actions are weakened. The Fourth Amendment guarantees the right of the people to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and demands that no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause particularly describing the place to be searched and the things to be seized. When legislation is written that waters down this standard it is not the guilty who suffer, but the innocent. When a bomb exploded in Madrid, Spain over-zealous government agents leapt to false conclusions based upon erroneous evidence, prejudice, and lies, which violated my constitutional rights and deprived me of my liberty. But it was a weakening of the standards in the law that allowed them to do it. The Patriot Act weakened the requirements the government needed under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in order to bug my home and office, and this weakening of the law – now found unconstitutional – caused the framework designed to protect the innocent to fail.
...
letter to congress from Brandon Mayfield
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/statement-brandon-mayfield-congress-urging-against-changes-foreign-intelligence-su

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAg8TRcL1LI

[ConHog]

letter to congress from Brandon Mayfield
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/statement-brandon-mayfield-congress-urging-against-changes-foreign-intelligence-su

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAg8TRcL1LI

I'm not familiar with the person you just quoted, but it appears to me that the fool is claiming Spain violated his Constitutional rights. :laugh2:

[revelarts]

I suggest that you don't even know Posse Comitatus allows and doesn't allow.

In a nutshell it makes it illegal for the US military (excepting the national guard and the coast guard) under federal authority to act as a police force within US borders. It doesn't prevent ANYTHING more.

Yes, that's what it means basically. and using the military to arrest or "detain" people on the U.S. "battleground" would quailfiy as a breach of the Posse Comitatus, seems pretty clear.

But as I said Bush and congress have already gutted the Posse Comitatus a few years ago.

...2006: On the Eve of the Midterm Elections (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=U.S._congressional_elections_in_20 06), PCA Nullified

Recently, Congress passed a controversial bill which grants the President the right to commandeer Federal or even state National Guard Troops and use them inside the United States. This bill, entitled the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Warner_Defense_Appropriation_ Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2007) (H.R. 5122.ENR), contains a provision, (Section 1076) which allows the President to:
“...employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to...


restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States..., where the President determines that,...domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order;
suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy...” [3] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.05122:)

Senator Patrick Leahy (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patrick_Leahy) and others have condemned Section 1076 because it effectively nullifies the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C. 331-335) and gives the President the legal ability to define under what conditions martial law (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Martial_law) may be declared. [4] (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=SMI20061107&articleId=3749)
H.R.5122 was signed into law by President Bush on October 17, 2006, and will take effect October 1, 2007 (unless an earlier effective date is established by regulation). "On the same day, Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006), which abolishes the legal protection of habeas corpus, authorizes the president to detain and jail anyone (even US citizens) without charge and subject them to harsh interrogation that may or may not involve torture." [5] (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=SMI20061107&articleId=3749)...


http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Posse_Comitatus_Act

[revelarts]

I'm not familiar with the person you just quoted, but it appears to me that the fool is claiming Spain violated his Constitutional rights.
Well it's funny that the U.S. Gov't gave mayfeild over a million in damages :laugh2:.


...Following the September 11, 2001 attacks (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks), Mayfield was concerned for the safety of his children and wife, and according to his father, he suspected that he was under surveillance by the federal authorities. In the weeks before his arrest, Mayfield's family was under the impression that their house had been broken into at least twice, although nothing was stolen. According to court documents, the FBI used National Security Letters (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/National_Security_Letters) in order to wiretap his phones, bug his house, and search his house several times.[2] (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield#cite_note-autogenerated1-1)

Fingerprints on a bag containing detonating devices, found by Spanish authorities following the Madrid commuter train bombings, were initially identified by the FBI as belonging to Mayfield ("100% verified"). According to the court documents in judge Ann Aiken (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Ann_Aiken)'s decision, this information was largely "fabricated and concocted by the FBI and DOJ". When the FBI finally sent Mayfield's fingerprints to the Spanish authorities, they contested the matching of the fingerprints from Brandon Mayfield to the ones associated with the Madrid bombing. Further, the Spanish authorities informed the FBI they had other suspects in the case, Moroccan immigrants not linked to anyone in the USA. The FBI completely disregarded all of the information from the Spanish authorities, and proceeded to spy on Mayfield and his family further.
As was discovered during the court case, even the FBI's own records show that this fingerprint, despite the sworn testimony of FBI and DOJ agents, was in all reality not an exact match but only one of 20 "similar" prints to the ones retrieved from Madrid. Based on that list of people with "similar prints" the FBI launched an extensive investigation of all 20 individuals using Letters of National Security. The investigation included medical records, financial records, employment records, etc. on all 20 people and their families. It was during this time that Brandon Mayfield's name rose to the top of the list.
The FBI arrested Mayfield at his offices in West Slope (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/West_Slope,_Oregon), an unincorporated suburb of Portland. The arrest was similar to the then-recent Mike Hawash (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Mike_Hawash) case, under a material witness (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Material_witness) warrant rather than under charge; he was held with no access to family and limited access, if any, to legal counsel. The FBI initially refused to inform either Mayfield or his family why he was being detained or where he was being held.
Later, the FBI leaked the nature of the charges to the local media and the family learned of the charges by watching the local news. He was at first held at a Multnomah County (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Multnomah_County,_Oregon) jail under a false name; he was later transferred to an unidentified location. His family protested that Mayfield had no connection with the bombings, nor had he been off the continent in over 11 to 14 years....


wiki

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akM19iWahY4&feature=relmfu

[ConHog]

Well it's funny that the U.S. Gov't gave mayfeild over a million in damages :laugh2:.


wiki

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akM19iWahY4&feature=relmfu

Well that clears it up. The Spanish government didn't do shit. Our government did. Which certainly is not how I read your original snippet and remark.