New link in the top of page "IRC Chat".
Register | Login
Views: 136301286
 Main | Memberlist | Active users | Calendar | Last Posts | IRC Chat | Online users
Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album 		12-04-24 09:34 PM
0 users currently in General Chat.
Xeogaming Forums - General Chat - New American Civil War Possible (NDAA-2012)
  
User name:
Password:
Reply:
 
Options: - -
UserPost
True Flight
Posts: 4740/5245		 DOES ANYBODY HERE KNOW WHAT AUMF IS?!

AUMF = Authorized use of MILITARY force

meaning MILITARY

The military is a huge bureacracy. There's so much that we need to do to focus on our own promotions like hell we're going to arrest you guys.

Oh and the worry on this bill is so maximized. It's so trivial. That damn bill has been drafted so many times. Alexandor posted up the OLDEST DRAFT the draft that Obama threatened to veto because the word TERRORIST is not clearly defined.

You have to understand. There are tons of intelligent people in the military and yes dumbfucks too. And ONLY 1% OF AMERICA ACTUALLY JOINS THE MILITARY.

So you have 99% of American people who are considered suspects to ONE PERCENT. Generals are smarter than that (most of the time... thanks CNN for being such an unknown enemy). Numbers don't lie. If Americans were to turn around and revolt and we had to go out and take care of it. In the end the military would be taken out completely.

oh hey I forgot OBAMAMAMALAMA has a message with this act. He said that his administration will NOT detain American soldiers.

Can someone say.... reelection?

Belial
Posts: 587/647		 Is it bad that I feel like I'm scared to voice my opinion on the internet, especially with things like the Patriot Act too? =/
Bitmap
Posts: 7664/7838		 Signed:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/with-reservations-obama-signs-act-to-allow-detention-of-citizens/

Try not to act like terrorists guys.
True Flight
Posts: 4721/5245		 I've actually looked into this. This bill was redone twice. TWICE...

FIRST OF ALL This is an article from yester:

NDAA Article

Section 1031 is no longer 1031 it is 1021. It states that:

Section 1021 purports to “affirm” the military’s authority to hold people in indefinite detention without charge pursuant to the AUMF. Although the original House version of the bill would have stated explicitly that the US continues to be in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated groups, the final version of the bill is somewhat more circumspect.

SO this is a little bit more discreet now.

Section 1022 is the one you need to be worried about.

Section 1022 takes a subset of the persons possibly subject to military detention under section 1021—focusing essentially on persons with a stronger connection to terrorism—and creates a presumption that they will be held in military detention.

So there's bad news and good news

Bad News:

The bad news is that, as passed, sections 1021 and 1022 represent clear congressional approval of what, up to now, has been solely the executive branch’s decision to hold people in indefinite detention without charge. (Remember that the AUMF itself was silent on detention questions.) Giving the practice a firm and explicit statutory grounding not only makes it less vulnerable to legal challenge, it may well make the practice more permanent.

Good News:

The good news, to the extent there is any, is that neither section 1021 nor section 1022 defines the “war” or the “hostilities” at issue. They do not, in other words, explicitly embrace the “global war on terror” paradigm that equates terrorism with armed conflict and suspected terrorists with enemy soldiers. By failing to address that question, they leave open the theoretical (if unlikely) possibility that a court could give the statute a narrow reading consistent with international law understandings of armed conflict.

Obama threatened to veto this bill TWICE because of those two sections.

The thing is it's not going to be forever... it really isn't indefinite. It's till the end of hostilities. *shrug* just putting out there that Wikipedia is not as accurate as you want it to be.



Woah... what?! PAY INCREASE FOR MILITARY?! Woohoo!

I was joking... yes... I was just joking... I make beans with the Reserves anyway if anyone pays attention.
Xeoman
Posts: 9657/11757		 What a great time to grow up in the US, huh guys?
Elara
Posts: 7551/9736		 I heard somewhere they it wasn't vetoed, but I have yet to verify that. I really hope that it was, because if this thing goes through... well... let's just say that all I need is a few natural disasters next year and my novel Darkfang will have become reality.
True Flight
Posts: 4719/5245		 I posted up a little blip about it before. According to that if you are missing a finger or have more than a week's worth of food you could be considered a terrorist. This has been vetoed from what my knowledge and reading into this has gotten from it.
Lord Alexandor
Posts: 331/417		 Didn't know where to put this, but it's probably the one of the most important issues for the USA right now.

NDAA Amendment for Fiscal Year 2012 is scary as shit. No joke, we now live in Nazi USA. This act gives the government and military the right to indefinitely detain any person, regardless of citizenship, without cause, charge, trial, or due process. It is a blatant violation of our Constitutional rights.

Originally posted by Wikipedia
Though the White House[4] and Senate sponsors[5] maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act legislatively codifies[6] the President's authority to indefinitely detain terrorism suspects, including American citizens, without trial as defined in Title X, Subtitle D, SEC 1031(a-e) of the bill.[7] Because those who may be held indefinitely include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, and because that detention may be by the military, the Act has received critical attention by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and media sources.


This video goes over the basics of what is happening in Congress related to this act: http://youtu.be/NW-e7z7S6VI

This is basically civil war...What side will you take? Totalitarian government or the Freedom of our United States Constitution? Obama violated his oath of office to defend the Constitution. Our military is sworn to protect not the government or it's wishes, but the people of the United States, our freedoms, and our Constitution.

It is time for all those who made a promise, and swore to defend the PEOPLE and the CONSTITUTION, to rise up to their responsibility and oath to defend against enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC.

/rant

PS: Check out my post over in the SOPA thread!

Edit: Reddit has a great thread and linked a great video about constitutional rights (2nd specifically): Okay, Obama, you're signing NDAA? Fine. Then I encourage Americans to buy guns.

In the comments (link) someone posted a link to a great video about the purpose of the second amendment: Link (http://youtu.be/bLRr02YrW6o)
Xeogaming Forums - General Chat - New American Civil War Possible (NDAA-2012)



xeogaming.org

AcmlmBoard 1.92++ r4 Baseline
?2000-2013 Acmlm, Emuz, Blades, Xkeeper, DarkSlaya*, Lord Alexandor*
*Unofficial Updates
Page rendered in 0.115 seconds.
0.039