Is America Being Punished for Not Voting Republican?

[Volitzer]

Versus the Globalist laws the 2 Oligarchy parties implement all the time.

Like repealing Posse-Comitatus, the stripping of the 4th Amendment, ignoring the natural-born clause of the US Constitution.

Biblical jurisprudence and Constitutional Boundries, can the other 2 parties say that ?

NOT !!!!!

[Robert0326]

Name one instance of the repeal of the 4th amendment or Posse Comitatus?  Betcha can't....  Can you?  Better yet, name me a Congressman  or Senator that is favor of this.

 And again you fail to realize that our nation was NOT founded on the Cristian faith.  Nor was the Constitution written with the Cristian faith in mind.

[Volitzer]

Yes, Americans Will Be Targeted As Terrorists Under the NDAA
       

Republican Congressman Amash warns that bill can be applied to U.S. citizens

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
Monday, November 28, 2011

Controversy over whether or not Americans are exempt from a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act bill, set to be voted on this week by the Senate, which defines the the entirety of the United States as a battleground in the war on terror, has been addressed by Republican Congressman Justin Amash, who warns that the bill does apply to U.S. citizens.


As we previously reported, 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 this week, 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.

That provoked concerns that American citizens could be targeted as terrorists and indefinitely detained without trial or charge.

“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,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech earlier this month.

Following an ACLU alert on the legislation, some pointed out that the text of the bill actually exempts Americans from being detained under the new “homeland battlefield” designation under the proviso that “the requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.”

However, as Republican Congressman Justin Amash told the The Grand Rapids Press today, the language of the bill is “carefully crafted to mislead the public.”

“Note that it does not preclude U.S. citizens from being detained indefinitely, without charge or trial, it simply makes such detention discretionary,” Amash wrote on his Facebook page.

The controversy over whether or not the text of the bill suggests the legislation applies to U.S. citizens is largely inconsequential given the fact that every piece of anti-terror legislation passed since 9/11 has been used against Americans, both at home and abroad.

The Patriot Act was passed in the name of giving federal authorities the tools to catch terrorists, but it has been used in hundreds of cases against American citizens, often in cases that have no relation whatsoever to terrorism.

Furthermore, as Ron Paul has pointed out, Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen who has never been charged with any crime, was the victim of extrajudicial killing because of the same unconstitutional legalese that defines the entire globe as a “battlefield,” where the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens are declared null and void if they are designated as terrorists by the federal government.

Indeed, national intelligence director Dennis Blair openly stated last year that, “Being a U.S. citizen will not spare an American from getting assassinated by military or intelligence operatives.”

Recall that José Padilla, an American citizen, was held without charge for 3 and a half years as an “enemy combatant” and denied a trial in civilian court, after being accused of planning to detonate a “dirty bomb,” an accusation that was enough to keep Padilla in a military brig for over three years yet was never proven.

As far back as December 2002, the Washington Post reported that a “parallel legal system” had been put in place under the auspices of the war on terror, in which terrorism suspects — U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike — may be investigated, jailed, interrogated, tried and punished without legal protections guaranteed by the ordinary system.”

The “battlefield” provision of the NDAA is nothing new, it is merely an updating of existing policy that has been applied to American citizens on numerous occasions over the last decade.

The difference is that the danger of American citizens being detained without trial as terrorists on frivolous pretexts is an even greater danger now 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.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/yes-americans-will-be-targeted-as-terrorists-under-the-ndaa.html

[Volitzer]

Rand Paul Aims to Kill “Indefinite Detention” Provision of Controversial Bill
       



Head of Japanese American Citizens League warns that bill has echoes of World War II-style internment without charge

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, November 29, 2011


With the bill expected to be up for a vote within 48 hours, Senator Rand Paul has offered an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that will kill a provision allowing the military to detain individuals, including American citizens, without trial or due process.

The “indefinite detention” sections of the NDAA bill would turn the whole of the United States into a “battlefield” and hand the executive branch the power to have the military arrest U.S. citizens and hold them without trial.

The provision is merely an update to the “parallel legal system” had been in place under the auspices of the war on terror for over a decade, “In which terrorism suspects — U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike — may be investigated, jailed, interrogated, tried and punished without legal protections guaranteed by the ordinary system,” as the Washington Post reported in December 2002.

In attempt to kill the indefinite detention provision of the legislation, Senator Rand Paul aims to strike Section 1031 from the bill, which reads as follows.

“Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force…includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons…Detention under the law of war without trial”.

The amendment is seen as having more teeth than a change offered by Colorado Senator Mark Udall which the ACLU has urged voters to support. “There are other similar Amendments too, however none of them completely eliminate the Constitutionally offensive section,” reports the Tennessee Campaign for Liberty website.

Writing in the Washington Post today, Udall emphasizes the fact that the bill does affect American citizens.

“The provisions would require the military to dedicate a significant number of personnel to capturing and holding terrorism suspects — in some cases indefinitely — even those apprehended on U.S. soil. And they authorize the military to do so regardless of an accused terrorist’s citizenship, even if he or she is an American captured in a U.S. city,” writes Udall.

Republican Congressman Justin Amash also warned that the bill had been “carefully crafted to mislead the public,” in suggesting that the indefinite detention provision didn’t apply to American citizens when it clearly does.

“Note that it does not preclude U.S. citizens from being detained indefinitely, without charge or trial, it simply makes such detention discretionary,” Amash wrote on his Facebook page.

As we documented yesterday, every single piece of legislation passed in the name of catching terrorists has been used against American citizens on countless occasions.

In an op-ed for the SIlicon Valley Mercury News, S. Floyd Mori, national executive director of the Japanese American Citizens League, warns that the legislation would create the legal framework for internment without trial on a similar scale to how Japanese-Americans were held in concentration camps during World War II.

“Indefinite detentions based on fear-driven and unlawfully substantiated national security grounds, where individuals are neither duly charged nor fairly tried, violate the essence of U.S. law and the most fundamental values upon which this country was built,” he writes.

The National Defense Authorization Act is set for a procedural vote at midday on Wednesday.


http://www.prisonplanet.com/rand-paul-aims-to-kill-indefinite-detention-provision-of-controversial-bill.html

[Volitzer]

Name one instance of the repeal of the 4th amendment or Posse Comitatus?  Betcha can't....  Can you?  Better yet, name me a Congressman  or Senator that is favor of this.

 And again you fail to realize that our nation was NOT founded on the Cristian faith.  Nor was the Constitution written with the Cristian faith in mind.

Amend S. 1867 to Prevent Indefinite Detention of Americans!


Drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin and John McCain, S. 1867, the Senate version of the National Defense Authorization Act contains a dangerous provision allowing American citizens to be detained by the military under the Authorization of Use for Military Force (AUMF) against Afghanistan.

Rep. Justin Amash, one of only five Republicans to vote against the House version earlier this spring, wrote on his Facebook page, the act would “permit the federal government to indefinitely detain American citizens on American soil, without charge or trial, at the discretion of the President.”

Completely ignoring the Constitution, Senators Levin and McCain are basically creating a provision giving the (current and future) President dictatorial powers to decide whom the military should arrest and whether they should be tried in military tribunals or civilian courts at the President's whim.

Thankfully, Senator Paul has introduced an amendment (SA 1062) to repeal the offending Sec. 1031 of S. 1867. 

You can help stop this egregious provision from passing by contacting your senators today at 202-224-3121 and urging them to vote YES on Senator Paul's Senate Amendment 1062 to strike Sec. 1031 of S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act.

At this point, the votes on amendments to this bill could begin anytime after 5:30PM this evening, so it's urgent you contact your senators immediately!

And while you have them on the phone, another amendment to S. 1867 worth asking your senators to support is Senator Paul's Senate Amendment 1064, to repeal the AUMF against Iraq to officially bring the Iraq war authority to an end.

Don't delay, contact your senators today at 202-224-3121 and urge them to vote YES on Senator Paul's Senate Amendments 1062 and 1064!



http://www.campaignforliberty.org/profile/7786/blog/2011/11/28/amend-s-1867-prevent-indefinite-detention-americans

[Robert0326]

Section 1031 ONLY pertains to detainees at Guantanamo.  More paranoid nonsense from prison
planet.   

[Volitzer]

Unless the government wants to, there's a governmental discretion clause later in the bill that lets the government decide whether to imprison people or not.

[Robert0326]

What section? Be more specific.