Sledge reports: "The Senate passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that was stripped of a prohibition of the indefinite military detention of US citizens on American soil."
'The National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 will now head to the White House.' (photo: Shutterstock)
Senate Passes NDAA Indefinite Detention Bill
26 December 12
he Senate passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that was stripped of a prohibition of the indefinite military detention of US citizens on American soil by an 81-14 vote on Friday, but only after a furious dissent on the chamber's floor by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who called it an "abomination."
The National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 will now head to the White House, which had earlier pledged to veto the NDAA because it prevents the president from closing the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. It is unclear whether the president will follow through on the threat.
The NDAA is a reauthorization of the large budget bill that sets the budget for a wide range of military activities, but it has proven most controversial for a provision that critics say would allow the military to abuse its detention powers to lock Americans away on the mere suspicion of support for terrorist groups.
In November, a bipartisan group of Senators affixed an amendment to the NDAA that would have explicitly prohibited the military from detaining American citizens on US soil. But earlier this week, a House-Senate conference committee led by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) stripped away that measure.
Paul, a libertarian Republican, voiced his opposition to the conference committee's move in strong terms and urged his colleagues to vote against the bill.
"We had protection in this bill. We passed an amendment that specifically said if you were an American citizen or here legally in the country, you would get a trial by jury," Paul said. "It's been removed because they want the ability to hold American citizens without trial in our country. This is so fundamentally wrong and goes against everything we stand for as a country that it can't go unnoticed."
"When you're accused of a crime in our country you get a trial, you get a trial by a jury of your peers, no matter how heinous your crime is, no matter how awful you are, we give you a trial," he said. "This bill takes away that right and says that if someone thinks you're dangerous, we will hold you without a trial. It's an abomination."
Citing past examples of injustice in America, including the military internment of Japanese-American citizens during World War II, Paul asked, "will America only begin to regret our loss of trial by jury when the people have names like Smith and Jones?"
He also pointed out the open-ended nature of the so-called "war on terror," which has now gone on for more than 11 years and shows no sign of letting up, even after the killing of Osama bin Laden. "When will your rights be restored if the battle has no end, and the battlefield is limitless, and the war is endless?" Paul asked.
But top Senators in support of the bill dismissed Paul's charges as bogus, claiming that language in the NDAA preserves Americans' constitutional right to trial by jury. Only when they ally themselves with foreign terrorist powers, they said, do Americans abdicate their rights as citizens.
Supporters of the NDAA like Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) pointed to new language in the conference committee report stipulating that "nothing" in the bill could construed to deny people of their rights in court -- language that civil liberties advocates dismissed as meaningless, since the controversy is over whether those suspected of terrorism are afforded the right to trial in the first place.
In defense of the bill and in response to Paul's claims, Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) said, "I don't mind saying I think we're at war."
"How long does that war last? I don't know. I can't tell you. Am I supposed to know that? Can we not fight it unless we know the date it ends? America, is it part of the battlefield?" Graham said. "What do you think al Qaeda would love to do more than anything else? Come here and destroy the building I am speaking in."
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 18 May 2013
|
 19 May 2013
|
 17 May 2013
|
 18 May 2013
|
 18 May 2013
|
 19 May 2013
|
 20 May 2013
|
|
17 May 2013
|
 18 May 2013
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
So, the Constitution already defines treason and it does not specify that an accusation of treason is sufficient for a person to lose their rights as a citizen.
Lastly, while not explicitly declared in the C US Constitution, the assumption of innocence has been declared valid by the Supreme Court.
This should be a question for all potential Supreme Court positions.
(sarcasm mode: off)
Seems to me we have another situation of similar proportions emerging here.
Oh and remember you asked how long the war lasts?
They only repealed the death sentence for 'Witchcraft, (Pagan Worship) in 1951 when the UK signed the international declaration of human rights. The best part of 500 years.
So now you have an idea of how long the war will last........... .....and last........... .....and last!
You have been warned many times and you still do nothing!
Wasn't that the whole point of the big show?
It's not enough to blog we must actually do something and placing pressure on our reps is something we can do. 202-224-3121
After the shooting, everyone was afraid. Any gun owner might be a fanatic spree shooter. Guns were branded a tool of hate and violence. Something had to be done. It was made obvious that the old laws were obsolete in the new order. But the news never said why Americans were angry and radicalized, and buying so many guns. Some said it was mental illness, or economic and social frustration caused by bad domestic policy. But that was in the past, and thus past fixing. A quick solution was desired, and quickly passed. Safety was once again ensured.
But over time the news made people aware of ever present fears of attack, and threats of violence, by enemies from within and without. In order to preserve their freedom and way of life, it was ultimately necessary to amputate civil liberties – in order to preserve civil liberty. And so it went, until there was nothing left to preserve – except the power of the State.
Let's get back to the root of so much evil in today's world: conduct a thorough, rational, and objective investigation of the 9/11 attacks without defending a foregone conclusion, the major failures of the Kean Commission and the NIST reports.
As Old Ben Franklin supposedly once said, " We have given you a Republic, now lets see if you can keep it?"
Or something to that effect . . . .
Hooray for Rand Paul for speaking truth to power! Such courage and tenacity should be commended by all those who take a real interest in defending the American Revolution.
RSS feed for comments to this post