NDAA S.1867 U.S.House Modified & Tried to Hide Indefinite Detention !!

The U.S. House of Representative voted in favor of NDAA S.1867 (the
House version (H.R 1540) after modifying it from having the part saying
U.S. army could arrest U.S. Citizens with no charges and hold
indefinitely without the right to a Trial that was in section 1031 in
the S.1867 version and spread it out over sections 1031 / 1032 / 1033 in
the House H.R.1540 version making it harder to find and understand ! --
(tlb-fns)

"Pass this on do Not let them get away with this !"

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 | Fellowship o
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 | Fellowship of
the Minds

Click here for more informed opinions.
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/tag/national-defense-authorization-act-for-fiscal-year-2012/

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
U.S. Citizens Still Subject to Detention w/out Trial in Final
Version of Defense Bill
Posted on December 14, 2011 by Dr. Eowyn | 11 Comments
The House and Senate Armed Services Committees met last Monday to
"reconcile" the two respective versions of the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012 which the House (HR 1540)
and the Senate (S 1867) had passed.
It appears they've removed U.S. citizens from S. 1867 Section 1031?s
arrest and detention without charge or trial.
--- " But then, it doesn't "? ---
Donna Cassata of the AP reports, Dec. 13, 2011:
WASHINGTON -Â Congress is pressing ahead with a massive $662
billion defense bill that requires military custody for terrorism
suspects linked to al-Qaida, including those captured within the U.S.,
with lawmakers hoping their last-minute revisions will mollify President
Barack Obama and eliminate a veto threat.
Leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees announced
late Monday that they had reached agreement on the policy-setting
legislation that had gotten caught up in an escalating fight on whether
to treat suspected terrorists as prisoners of war or criminals in the
civilian justice system. [...]
The lawmakers said they hoped the House and Senate could vote on the
final bill by Thursday and send it to the president.
The issue of how to handle captured terrorist suspects has divided
Obama's senior national security officials and Congress, as well as
Democrats and Republicans.
The administration insists that military, law enforcement and
intelligence officials need flexibility in prosecuting the war on
terror. Obama points to his administration's successes in eliminating
Osama bin Laden and radical Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Republicans
counter that their efforts are necessary to respond to an evolving,
post-Sept. 11 threat, and that Obama has failed to produce a consistent
policy on handling terror suspects.
The bill would require that the military take custody of a suspect
deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates who is involved in
plotting or committing attacks on the United States, with an exemption
for U.S. citizens.
Several paragraphs after that, however, there's this paragraph:
The legislation would deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens
seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them
to indefinite detention. The lawmakers made no changes to that language.
I'm thoroughly confused. I will need to find and read the final
"reconciled" version of the NDAA, but the bill is not yet available on
the Library of Congress' Thomas website.
At this point, it looks to me that this "reconciled" version has
retained S. 1867?s Sections 1031 and 1032. The "exemption for U.S.
citizens" pertains to Sec. 1032; the indefinite detention and denial of
the right to trial to "even U.S. citizens" pertains to S.1867?s Sec.
1031 — the same Sec. 1031 that we find so problematic and threatening.
Nothing's changed.
So much for conservatives putting our hopes in Congressman Allen West,
who's a member of the "conference committee" that produced this
reconciled version of the NDAA. If you need more confirmation that Allen
West is an enemy of freedom, listen to Glenn Beck's radio interview of
West on the NDAA yesterday. Go here. I heard it live and was ready to
spit nails.
Allen West also voted for the Budget Control Act of 2011, the passage of
which immediately increased our national debt ceiling by $2+ trillion.
I will do everything I can to see that Allen West does not get
re-elected.

-----------------------------------------------------

has did H.R. 1540 change changed section 1031 of S.1867   - Google Search 

Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - H.R.1540 - THOMAS
(Library of Congress)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.01540: 

Do you feel that NDAA HR 1540/ S 1867 is a terrorist attack on the
American citizens from with in our own government???
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/do-you-feel-that-ndaa-hr-1540-s-1867-is-a-terrorist-attack-on-the-american-citizens-from-with-in-ou/question-2337083/ 

has did H.R. 1540 change changed section 1031 of S.1867 - Google Search
http://www.google.com/search?spell=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&source=hp&gbv=1&q=has+did+H.R.+1540+change+changed+section+1031+of+S.1867


-----Original Message-----
From: ranger116@webtv.net (T B)
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 03:19:04 -0500
To: Ranger116@webtv.net (T Lee Buyea - Fla.News Service)
Subject: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 |
Fellowship o


National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 | Fellowship of
the Minds
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/tag/national-defense-authorization-act-for-fiscal-year-2012/ 

this is ifrom november 23, 2011

Senators Demand the Military Lock Up of American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They Define as Being Right Outside Your Window

UPDATE III: The Senate rejected the Udall amendment 38-60.

While nearly all Americans head to family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, the Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.

Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians without charge or trial.

The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.

The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?

The answer on why now is nothing more than election season politics. The White House, the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney General have all said that the indefinite detention provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act are harmful and counterproductive. The White House has even threatened a veto. But Senate politics has propelled this bad legislation to the Senate floor.

But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.

In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in.

In response to proponents of the indefinite detention legislation who contend that the bill “applies to American citizens and designates the world as the battlefield,” and that the “heart of the issue is whether or not the United States is part of the battlefield,” Sen. Udall disagrees, and says that we can win this fight without worldwide war and worldwide indefinite detention.

The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown. That is an extreme position that will forever change our country.

Now is the time to stop this bad idea. Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

UPDATE I: Don’t be confused by anyone claiming that the indefinite detention legislation does not apply to American citizens. It does. There is an exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032 of the bill), but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1031 of the bill). So, the result is that, under the bill, the military has the power to indefinitely imprison American citizens, but it does not have to use its power unless ordered to do so.

But you don’t have to believe us. Instead, read what one of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Lindsey Graham said about it on the Senate floor: “1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”

There you have it — indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial. And the Senate is likely to vote on it Monday or Tuesday.

UPDATE II: The debate on NDAA has begun. Your Senator needs to hear from you RIGHT NOW! >>

Learn more about detention: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.

VIDEO ON THIS TOPIC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QktGAtHLt2Q

Frontier Gibberish John McCain: Military Strips Citizens Of Their Miranda Rights ~ S.B. 1867 – McCain vs. Rand Paul

JOHN MCCAIN SAYS THE TERRORISTS RELEASED AT GUANTANAMO BAY GO BACK TO FIGHT OUR SOLDIERS. THEREFORE, WE MUST TAKE AMERICAN MIRANDA RIGHTS AWAY AND GET READY TO PUT THE MILITARY ONTO AMERICA’S STREETS IN VIOLATION OF THE Posse Comitatus Act.

NOW I ASK YOU, “WHO CAN ARGUE WITH THAT?”

Watch Here As McCain diverts the question from Senator Paul and gives the generalized summary w/o addressing “suspect” which is in S.B. 1867. A provision of S. 1867, or the National Defense Authorization Act bill, written by Senators John McCain and Carl Levin, declares American soil a battlefield and allows the President and all future Chief Executives to order the military to arrest and detain American citizens, innocent or not, without charge or trial.

Due Process Miranda Rights For Terrorists But Not For American Citizens!

This bill was written in secret and approved by committee without a single hearing. Senate Republicans support the bill and enough Democrats support it to give it a great chance of passing. This provision does have opponents. President Obama has threatened to veto the bill and even Ron Paul is concerned enough to bring it up during one of the GOP debates. An amendment called the Udall Amendment has been offered by Democratic Senator Mark Udall that would delete the dangerous provision.

If you are an American citizen, protect your constitutional rights. Call your senator and tell them to approve of the Udall Amendment. No American citizen should be arrested by the military and held indefinitely without charge or trial. It’s not conducive to American values and would give the military and the government more power over the American citizenry. The last time Americans had to deal with an overreaching military was during the Revolutionary era. Because of that, the Founders included the 3rd Amendment to ban the quartering of troops during times of war and peace. Once again, Americans are under threat of dealing with a military that has more power than it should have. And it could cost us most of the freedoms we tend to take for granted.

America is NOT a battlefield. America is a free country and American citizens should not ever be arrested by the military and certainly not without being charged or getting a trial. This provision would cast aside the Constitution and put the liberties of American citizens here at home and around the world at serious risk. Please call your senator or visit this link, because this is a risk Americans cannot afford to take.
Addicting Info

Recently I reported on the highly controversial bill S. 1253, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year of 2012 which was introduced back in June.

This bill was replaced by the one introduced on the 15^th of November, S. 1867. Today Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky and Senator John McCain of Arizona faced off on the floor of the Senate over a proposed amendment to S. 1867.

The minimal coverage this bill is getting in the corporate-controlled establishment media, especially when it comes to the massive danger it poses to everything America was built upon, is nothing short of deplorable.

This amendment would, according to Senator Paul, put “every single American citizen at risk.” Paul rightly pointed out that if the amendment were to pass, “the terrorists have won.”

I couldn’t agree more and this is the major fact that McCain and far too many others in Washington seem to miss. Or, equally likely, McCain and others are well aware of the erosion of civil liberties and have no interest in stopping it.

John McCain is a man who revels in death and suffering in true sociopathic style: joking about bombing Iran, calling for military operations in Syria, and supporting the murderous and thoroughly racist al Qaeda-affiliated Libyan rebels.

McCain is the epitome of Washington doublethink: in Libya, al Qaeda is good. Yet, is al Qaeda still the biggest threat to humanity, so much so that it justifies turning the entire world into a theater of war in which all rights are suspended in the name of the war on terror?

Senator Paul argued against the amendment to S. 1867 that McCain co-sponsored by saying, “Should we err today and remove some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism, well then the terrorists have won. [D]etaining American citizens without a court trial is not American.”

Unfortunately, the PATRIOT Act has already removed “some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism,” but there are very few politicians who will put their careers on their line in saying this fact.

McCain quickly attempted to defend the amendment he’s been peddling on the Senate floor by saying, “Facts are stubborn things. If the senator from Kentucky wants to have a situation prevail where people who are released go back in to the fight to kill Americans, he is entitled to his opinion.”

This is the typical, “Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists,” fallacious logic employed by those in Washington who will take every opportunity to exploit the non-threat of terrorism as a method of control and erosion of civil liberties.

McCain, who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is a member of the camp of individuals who either lie on a regular basis while knowing the facts, or are so deluded and removed from reality that they actually fear the al Qaeda bogeyman.

Senator McCain, just like the non-profit groups that are directly linked to the Department of Homeland Security, promotes a fear of terrorism that is completely at odds with the facts, using this climate of fear and paranoia to justify otherwise unacceptable legislation like S. 1867 and the PATRIOT Act.

McCain’s proposed amendment would allow the executive branch, which has already murdered American citizens abroad without so much as a single charge, to have power over whether a suspect is put through the civilian court system or through the military tribunal system.

Military tribunals are the complete antithesis of the civilian justice system, and putting American citizens through such a system would signal the death of everything the American justice system was built upon.

The most dangerous aspect of S. 1867 is not only that it could subject American citizens to military tribunals and detention, but also that individuals could be imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial.

Even if this was not used on American citizens, it represents a deplorable move that would only make the rest of the world hate us that much more, knowing that it is explicitly allowed for the American government to snatch up people and detain them forever without charge or trial.

If any other government were to even consider engaging in such behavior, people like Hillary Clinton who laughably claim to support human rights, would likely decry such moves.

Yet, the nonsensical logic of American exceptionalism makes people like McCain think that America has the right to operate outside of the rule of law (not to mention common decency and respect for other human beings) at home and abroad, so long as it is supposedly to combat terrorism.

Senator Paul countered McCain’s absurd assertion by saying, “I don’t think it necessarily follows I am arguing of the release of prisoners. I am simply arguing that particularly American citizens should not be sent to a foreign prison without due process.”

It amazes me that any such thing would have to even be argued. The Constitution is supposed to protect us from such egregious breaches of our inalienable rights; and our so-called representatives take an oath to protect the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic.

It is now clear that the true enemies of the Constitution, the ones that truly put our liberties in danger, are domestic.

They wear expensive suits and happily stroll through the halls of power in Washington, seemingly confident that they will not be treated as the traitorous criminals that they are.

McCain is one of these traitors who are launching an all-out assault on our way of life and our civil rights, S. 1867 is just the most recent, and most virulent, manifestation of this.

“An individual, no matter who they are, if they pose a threat to the security of the United States of America, should not be allowed to continue that threat,” McCain said in defense of his attack on our rights.

“We need to take every stop necessary to prevent that from happening, that’s for the safety and security of the men and women who are out there risking their lives … in our armed services,” McCain added.

The real people who put the men and women in our armed services at risk are warmongers like McCain who happily put Americans in the line of fire in order to keep their war profiteering cronies satisfied.

44 Republican Senators and 15 Democrats along with one Independent voted to keep the new detainee provisions in the NDAA, with Senator Paul and Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois being among the few Republicans who broke party ranks and sided with a majority of Democrats who voted to block the new provisions.

Paul argued, “If these provisions pass, we could see American citizens being sent to Guantanamo Bay,” while Republican Senator Lindsey Graham countered, “To be clear: These provisions do not apply to U.S. citizens.”

Did that stop the American government from murdering a citizen of the United States in Yemen in a drone attack?

No, in fact, the National Security Council’s secret death panel makes these decisions outside of all legislation and accountability, so Graham’s claim that it wouldn’t apply to American citizens is hollow, at best.

A couple of days ago Glenn Greenwald, a journalist for Salon and a former Constitutional and civil rights lawyer tweeted a very similar sentiment:

With very few exceptions, the McCain-Levin bill, awful though it is, doesn’t create any powers beyond what the O[bama] Admin[istration] thinks it now has.

The problem is that this bill would make it explicitly legal for the United States to conduct the horrific operations they have already been carrying out.

If this were to pass, there would be absolutely nothing standing in the way of the governmentrounding up dissidents who they could easily label terrorists or individuals planning/supporting terrorism (given the absurdly broad definition used).

They could then imprison them without charge or trial for however long they please, and if they have their way, they would be able to openly torture them, not just the torture deceptively labeled “enhanced interrogation” but torture that can go by no other name.

Of course, that is not to diminish the fact that the tactics now employed by the CIA and others are indeed torture. Just ask people like conservative radio host Mancow who was waterboarded and came to the conclusion that it is indeed torture after having held the complete opposite opinion previously.

Or if that isn’t enough proof, take the Vanity Fair article written by Christopher Hitchens in which he describes his experience being waterboarded which brought him to the exact same conclusion: waterboarding is torture.

Even Bahrain ostensibly has more democratic accountability for torture, although I think we all know that is about as legitimate as calling waterboarding “enhanced interrogation.”

McCain laughably claimed that the changes would “help defend our nation against the threat posed by al Qaeda while upholding our values and honoring our Constitution.”

This is especially hilarious given that McCain said that the al Qaeda-affiliated Libyan rebels “inspired the world” in carrying out their bloody revolution.

Does McCain actually believe that he has the power to pick and choose when individuals and groups directly linked to al Qaeda are good or bad?

How can they actually reconcile such absurdist moral relativism? Personally, I don’t think that McCain can actually believe the things he says unless he has actually been able to eliminate every bit of sense and logic that is innate in human beings.

To the many people commenting and emailing me claiming that this is overblown and it will not apply to American citizens, you might want to listen to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham’s own words on the Senate floor.

“In summary here, [section] 1032, the military custody provision, which has waivers and a lot of flexibility doesn’t apply to American citizens. [Section] 1031, the statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens, and it designates the world as the battlefield including the homeland,” Graham said.

Is there really anything even remotely unclear here? Our government is making the final strides towards turning the brutal military apparatus that has slaughtered so many people abroad in the name of “freedom” back to our own people.

What we are witnessing now is truly historic, the American government is trying to explicitly codify the ability to detain Americans without trial or charge in a military facility under military rule with military tribunals.

In fact, The Washington Post reported on the usage of aerial drones domestically in January of this year along with Homeland Security News Wire.

Currently, law enforcement agencies supposedly have to seek out emergency authorization from the FAA to use drones, which, according to The Washington Post is “only occasionally” granted.

The new FAA regulations coupled with turning the United States into a battlefield in which all Americans could be enemy combatants is dangerous, to say the least.

Given the fact that our current administration under the traitorous warmonger Barack Obama has no problem killing children with drones abroad, do we really think that they wouldn’t conduct such operations at home?

To an administration that commits extrajudicial executions of American citizens – and their 16-year-old child who was born in Denver, Colorado – is anything off the table?

The unfortunate and thoroughly disturbing reality is that our government has no problem carrying out such operations and S. 1867 would just make it that much easier by codifying it and creating an explicit legal apparatus through which they can operate.

I highly recommend that you explore at least some of the 344 proposed amendments for S. 1867 in the Library of Congress’ Thomas system which can be found here.

You can track all of the updates on the act with the amendments organized by date on this Library of Congress page.

As you can tell, the 28^th was by far the busiest day so far in the life of S. 1867 with over 100 amendments considered in that single day, although this very well might be beat in coming days when our so-called representatives continue to debate turning the United States into a giant battlefield.

UPDATE: If the ridiculous assault on our inalienable rights embodied by S. 1867 wasn’t enough, the Senate is also considering repealing the anti-torture measures currently in place (lax though they may be).

This flies in the face of the fact that torture does not provide actionable intelligence or anything even remotely reliable unless you’re looking for a false confession to anything from terrorism to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln.

This bill must be stopped if we want to preserve anything that America is supposed to stand for. The PATRIOT Act was a crippling blow to the Constitution but S. 1867 would be the death of every last bastion of hope and freedom that was left after the vicious attacks on our civil liberties that have brought us to this point.

Occupy Medford Oregon

Source(s) : Activist Post / Prison Planet – Do Not Be Deceived: S. 1867 is the Most Dangerous Bill Since the Patriot Act

Related Articles

• CFR Thug John McCain: Military Strips Citizens Of Their Miranda Rights ~ S.B. 1867 – McCain vs. Rand Paul. (politicalvelcraft.org)
• ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill Set For Final Vote Thursday (prisonplanet.com)
• Check Out Sen. Rand Paul Railing Against the War on Terror’s Excesses and the Potential Detainment of American Citizens (reason.com)
• The Police State is Coming (twentiesfreedom.wordpress.com)
• Battlefield US: Americans face arrest as war criminals under Army state law (promoteliberty.wordpress.com)
• Senate Passes Bill Allowing Indefinite Detention of Americans … Considers Bill Authorizing More Torture (zerohedge.com)
• McCain Justifies Indefinite Detention of American Citizens with Debunked Statistics (prisonplanet.com)

Related Articles:

SB 1867: when the war comes home

Senate Bill to OK Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Charge or Trial

SB 1867, Worldwide Indefinite Detention and the Senators Who Betrayed You

YOU CAN WATCH OTHER VIDEOS HERE  http://politicalvelcraft.org/2011/12/02/council-on-foreign-relations-thug-john-mccain-stripping-the-american-citizen-of-their-miranda-rights-to-due-process-s-1867-coverage-mccain-vs-rand-paul/

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=BILL+S+1867

NOTE FROM DEE:  IT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER THAT ENEMY COMBATANTS CAN G OTO GUANTANAMO OBAY WHICH OBAMA SAID HE WAS GOING TO CLOSE.  WHAT ABOUT THE FEMA CAMPS WHICH ARE BEING BUILT AND COCUPIED BY STAFF FASTER THAN WE CAN ESTIMATE:

1. Find the FEMA Concentration Camp Near You!

   Find the FEMA Concentration Camp Near You! OR. Air Force Bases per State and Country. updated 3-21-08 . If you live anywhere near one of these camps and have seen it ...

   www.greatdreams.com/concentration-camp-locations.htm - Cached
   

2. HR-645 - FEMA CAMPS - DREAMS OF THE GREAT EARTH CHANGES

   ROGERS REPORT *Congress Seeks To Authorize & Legalize FEMA Camp Facilities Published on 01-26-2009 Source: www.roguegovernment.com By: Lee Rogers

   www.greatdreams.com/political/HR-645.htm - Cached
   

3. CONCENTRATION CAMPS IN THE U.S.? - DREAMS OF THE GREAT EARTH ...

   These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) should ... FEMA AND THE NSC. DETENTION CAMPS DURING WWII. CONSPIRACIES.

   www.greatdreams.com/concentration.htm - Cached
   

4. A THIRD PEAL HARBOR?

   FEMA CAMP - INDIANA - VIDEO. FEMA COFFINS? VIDEO. RED LINE ... Directs FEMA to take control over all government agencies in time of emergency. FEMA is ...

   www.greatdreams.com/war/third-pearl-harbor.htm - Cached
   

5. CONCENTRATION CAMP PLANS FOR U.S. CITIZENS

   This called for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ... "Those on the Red well be taken to FEMA concentration camps and immediately executed.

   www.greatdreams.com/concentration_camp_plans.htm

1. FEMA TERRORIST DRILL - 09 - DREAMS OF THE GREAT EARTH CHANGES

   It is said Boyd — a poster child for “white al-Qaeda” if there ever was one — trained at a terrorist camp in ... Federal Emergency Management Agency, ...

   www.greatdreams.com/terror/FEMA-exercise-09.htm - Cached
   

2. THE UNITED NATIONS - A VISION AND THE REALITY

   The Blue will also be taken to FEMA camps and be given the choice between 're-education' or execution. The Green well ...

   www.greatdreams.com/unvision.htm

11. RED LINE - BLUE LINE - THE DREAM AND THE REALITY

    The Blue will also be taken to FEMA camps and be given the choice between 're-education' or execution. The Green well ...

    www.greatdreams.com/redline.htm - Cached
    

12. Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors as Pacifiers in Preparation ...

    A Pastor has come forward to blow the whistle on a nationwide FEMA program which is training Pastors and ... He also highlighted how detention camps had been ...

    www.greatdreams.com/political/secret_fema_plan.htm

PAY ATTENTION TO THIS ONE

21. THE WHITE ANIMALS HAVE RETURNED - DREAMS OF THE GREAT EARTH ...

    To the danger of the United States Constitution being overthrown there, sadly, ...

    www.greatdreams.com/prophecy/white-animals.html - Cached
    

22. Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) & the New World Order

    However, those among them who have sworn an oath before God to uphold and defend The Constitution: the President, members of Congress, and the military; ...

    www.greatdreams.com/cfr2.htm

or here: 

While I argue that we already live in a police state, based on the citizen spying programs, ludicrous amounts of domestic surveillance, collection and storage of massive amounts of biometric information, and the Department of Homeland Security’s invisible surveillance state (just to mention a few) the passage of this bill would bring about a new dangerous paradigm in America.

Even if it was sold as something that wouldn’t apply to American citizens, like the PATRIOT Act was sold as a counterterrorism bill, it would undoubtedly be used against us regardless of these claims, just as the PATRIOT Act has been utilized in cases wholly unrelated to terrorism.

Even the officials from the Department of Justice readily admit that the PATRIOT Act is being used against non-terrorist American citizens.

As you will see in the above video, they admit that the PATRIOT Act is used in cases completely unrelated to terrorism.

Is anyone really naïve enough to believe that the government will actually restrict the usage of S. 1867 to terrorists and not Americans who stand up to their corrupt, out of control, and wholly illegitimate criminal government?

To make matters even worse, the usage of drones in the United States is being considered by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Yet, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, have been used by law enforcement in the United States for some time now.

December 25, 2011

Montanans Launch Recall of Senators Who Approved NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, US Senate

The issue of federal official recall has never reached the federal courts.

Special thanks: Campaign photos on Facebook

(HELENA) - Moving quickly on Christmas Day after the US Senate voted 86 - 14 to pass the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA) which allows for the indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial, Montanans have announced the launch of recall campaigns against Senators Max Baucus and Jonathan Tester, who voted for the bill.

Montana is one of nine states with provisions that say that the right of recall extends to recalling members of its federal congressional delegation, pursuant to Montana Code 2-16-603, on the grounds of physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of certain felony offenses.

Section 2 of Montana Code 2-16-603 reads:

"(2) A public officer holding an elective office may be recalled by the qualified electors entitled to vote for the elective officer's successor."

The website Ballotpedia.org cites eight other states which allow for the recall of elected federal officials: Arizona, Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, and Wisconsin. New Jersey's federal recall law was struck down when a NJ state judge ruled that "the federal Constitution does not allow states the power to recall U.S. senators," despite the fact the Constitution explicitly allows, by not disallowing ("prohibited" in the Tenth Amendment,) the states the power to recall US senators and congressmen:

"The powers not...prohibited...are reserved to the States...or to the people." - Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The issue of federal official recall has never reached the federal courts.

Montana law requires grounds for recall to be stated which show conformity to the allowed grounds for recall. The draft language of the Montana petitions, "reason for recall" reads:

"The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees all U.S citizens:

"a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed..."

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA 2011) permanently abolishes the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, "for the duration of hostilities" in the War on Terror, which was defined by President George W. Bush as "task which does not end" to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2001.

Those who voted Aye on December 15th, 2011, Bill of Rights Day, for NDAA 2011 have attempted to grant powers which cannot be granted, which violate both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

The Montana Recall Act stipulates that officials including US senators can only be recalled for physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of the oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of a felony offense. We the undersigned call for a recall election to be held for Senator Max S. Baucus [and Senator Jonathan Tester] and charge that he has violated his oath of office, to protect and defend the United States Constitution."

Montana residents William Crain and Stewart Rhodes are spearheading the drive. Mr. Crain is an artist. Mr. Rhodes is an attorney, Yale Law School graduate, and the national president of the organization Oath Keepers, who are military and law enforcement officers, both former and active duty, who vow to uphold their Oath to the US Constitution and to disobey illegal orders which constitute attacks on their fellow citizens. Rhodes said:

"These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution. It's not about the left or right, it's about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America. It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization."

Rhodes noted that:

"Two time Medal of Honor winner Marine General Smedley Butler once said "There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. Time to fight. "

Butler famously ended his career as a Marine General by touring the country with his speech and book denouncing war, "War is a Racket."Butler confessed that he had spent most of his life as a "high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers...a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism..."

Eighteen states at present have recall laws, most of which do not apply to federal officials. For these and other states to recall federal officials, state legislatures would have to first pass or amend such laws.

Rising on the House floor to oppose the bill based on the military detention provisions for Americans, Rep. Tom McClintock said before the House vote:

" today, we who have

sworn fealty to that Constitution sit to consider a bill that affirms a power contained in no law and that has the full potential to crack the very foundation of American liberty."

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said in opposing the final NDAA:

”This bill also contains misguided provisions that in the name of fighting terrorism essentially authorize the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens without charges.”

And in a New York Times op-ed piece by two retired four-star U.S. Marine generals, Charles Krulak and Joseph Hoar, Krulak and Hoar said that "Due process would be a thing of the past."

Montana would be the first recall drive to be launched as a result of the vote for the NDAA military detentions provisions. A number of Facebook pages appeared after the passage of the bill from locations across the country.

References:

Facebook: "Recall Every Congressman Who Voted for the NDAA"

http://www.facebook.com/...

"Recalling Senators and Congressmen"
http://www.uscitizensassociation.com/...

Congressmen"
http://recallthetraitors.blogspot.com/...

Special thanks to Daily Kos

list of names of senators, for and against the bill

Sponsor

Senator

Carl Levin

D-MI

No Co-Sponsors

Committees

• Senate Armed Services

Related Issue Areas

• Water quality
• Washington State

• Transportation programs funding
• Terrorism
• Strategic materials and reserves
• Spacecraft and satellites
• Russia
• Research and development
• Research administration and funding
• Public utilities and utility rates
• Public contracts and procurement
• Pakistan
• Nuclear weapons
• North Korea
• North Carolina
• News media and reporting
• New York State
• National Guard and reserves
• Military readiness
• Military procurement, research, weapons development
• Military personnel and dependents
• Military operations and strategy
• Military medicine
• Military facilities and property
• Military education and training
• Military assistance, sales, and agreements
• Middle East
• Marine pollution
• Marine and inland water transportation
• Land use and conservation
• Land transfers
• Japan
• Iraq
• Iran
• Internet and video services
• Industrial facilities
• Hazardous wastes and toxic substances
• Hawaii
• Guam
• Government investigations
• Government information and archives
• Germany
• Executive agency funding and structure
• Europe
• Energy efficiency and conservation
• Electric power generation and transmission
• Drug trafficking and controlled substances
• Department of Transportation
• Department of Defense
• Defense spending
• Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
• Congressional oversight
• Chemical and biological weapons
• California
• Asia
• Arms control and nonproliferation
• Armed Forces Retirement Home
• Arkansas
• Alternative and renewable resources
• Alliances
• Africa
• Afghanistan
• Advisory bodies
• Armed forces and national security

Data via Congressional Research Service View all Issues (62 more)Hide Issues

Congress > Roll Call Votes > 112th Congress close If you already have registered an account on GovTrack, access your saved settings by logging in below. - Sign in with a GovTrack username/password for existing accounts. Email: Password: Forgot your password? - Sign in with a third-party account or OpenID (recommended for new users). - Register a new GovTrack username/password. Registering on the site lets you save your tracker settings and gives you the option for receiving email updates for congressional activity that matches the trackers you choose.
Senate Vote On Passage: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 Number: Senate Vote #218 in 2011 [primary source: senate.gov] Date: Dec 1, 2011 8:02PM Result: Bill Passed Bill: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012	(About Ads | Advertise Here)
CSV XML Vote Overview Totals Democrats Republicans Independents All Votes Needed To Win Yea: 93 (93%) 48 44 1 Nay: 7 (7%) 3 3 1 Present: 0 (0%) 0 0 0 Not Voting: 0 (0%) 0 0 0 Required: Simple Majority of 100 votes (=51 votes) (Vacancies in Congress will affect vote totals.) More information: Aye versus Yea Explained Vote Details Cartogram Standard Projection Horizontal bars indicate the two senators from a state voted differently. Cartograms give an equal area in an image to an equal number of votes by distorting the image. Senate vote cartograms are shown with each state stretched or shrunk so that the states each take up an equal area because each state has two votes. For House votes, it is each congressional district which is stretched or shrunk. Vote [Sort] State [Sort] Representative [Sort by Name] [Sort by Party] Alabama Yea AL Sessions, Jefferson [R] Yea AL Shelby, Richard [R] Alaska Yea AK Begich, Mark [D] Yea AK Murkowski, Lisa [R] Arizona Yea AZ Kyl, Jon [R] Yea AZ McCain, John [R] Arkansas Yea AR Boozman, John [R] Yea AR Pryor, Mark [D] California Yea CA Boxer, Barbara [D] Yea CA Feinstein, Dianne [D] Colorado Yea CO Bennet, Michael [D] Yea CO Udall, Mark [D] Connecticut Yea CT Blumenthal, Richard [D] Yea CT Lieberman, Joseph [I] Delaware Yea DE Carper, Thomas [D] Yea DE Coons, Chris [D] Florida Yea FL Nelson, Bill [D] Yea FL Rubio, Marco [R] Georgia Yea GA Chambliss, Saxby [R] Yea GA Isakson, John [R] Hawaii Yea HI Akaka, Daniel [D] Yea HI Inouye, Daniel [D] Idaho Yea ID Crapo, Michael [R] Yea ID Risch, James [R] Illinois Yea IL Durbin, Richard [D] Yea IL Kirk, Mark [R] Indiana Yea IN Coats, Daniel [R] Yea IN Lugar, Richard [R] Iowa Yea IA Grassley, Charles [R] Nay IA Harkin, Thomas [D] Kansas Yea KS Moran, Jerry [R] Yea KS Roberts, Pat [R] Kentucky Yea KY McConnell, Mitch [R] Nay KY Paul, Rand [R] Louisiana Yea LA Landrieu, Mary [D] Yea LA Vitter, David [R] Maine Yea ME Collins, Susan [R] Yea ME Snowe, Olympia [R] Maryland Yea MD Cardin, Benjamin [D] Yea MD Mikulski, Barbara [D] Massachusetts Yea MA Brown, Scott [R] Yea MA Kerry, John [D] Michigan Yea MI Levin, Carl [D] Yea MI Stabenow, Debbie Ann [D] Minnesota Yea MN Franken, Al [D] Yea MN Klobuchar, Amy [D] Mississippi Yea MS Cochran, Thad [R] Yea MS Wicker, Roger [R] Missouri Yea MO Blunt, Roy [R] Yea MO McCaskill, Claire [D] Montana Yea MT Baucus, Max [D] Yea MT Tester, Jon [D] Nebraska Yea NE Johanns, Mike [R] Yea NE Nelson, Ben [D] Nevada Yea NV Heller, Dean [R] Yea NV Reid, Harry [D] New Hampshire Yea NH Ayotte, Kelly [R] Yea NH Shaheen, Jeanne [D] New Jersey Yea NJ Lautenberg, Frank [D] Yea NJ Menendez, Robert [D] New Mexico Yea NM Bingaman, Jeff [D] Yea NM Udall, Tom [D] New York Yea NY Gillibrand, Kirsten [D] Yea NY Schumer, Charles [D] North Carolina Yea NC Burr, Richard [R] Yea NC Hagan, Kay [D] North Dakota Yea ND Conrad, Kent [D] Yea ND Hoeven, John [R] Ohio Yea OH Brown, Sherrod [D] Yea OH Portman, Robert [R] Oklahoma Nay OK Coburn, Thomas [R] Yea OK Inhofe, James [R] Oregon Nay OR Merkley, Jeff [D] Nay OR Wyden, Ron [D] Pennsylvania Yea PA Casey, Robert [D] Yea PA Toomey, Patrick [R] Rhode Island Yea RI Reed, John [D] Yea RI Whitehouse, Sheldon [D] South Carolina Yea SC DeMint, Jim [R] Yea SC Graham, Lindsey [R] South Dakota Yea SD Johnson, Tim [D] Yea SD Thune, John [R] Tennessee Yea TN Alexander, Lamar [R] Yea TN Corker, Bob [R] Texas Yea TX Cornyn, John [R] Yea TX Hutchison, Kay [R] Utah Yea UT Hatch, Orrin [R] Nay UT Lee, Mike [R] Vermont Yea VT Leahy, Patrick [D] Nay VT Sanders, Bernard [I] Virginia Yea VA Warner, Mark [D] Yea VA Webb, Jim [D] Washington Yea WA Cantwell, Maria [D] Yea WA Murray, Patty [D] West Virginia Yea WV Manchin, Joe [D] Yea WV Rockefeller, John [D] Wisconsin Yea WI Johnson, Ron [R] Yea WI Kohl, Herbert [D] Wyoming Yea WY Barrasso, John [R] Yea WY Enzi, Michael [R]
GovTrack.us is a project of Civic Impulse, LLC. Read about GovTrack. Feedback (but not political opining) is welcome to operations@govtrack.us, but I can't do your research for you, nor can I pass on messages to Members of Congress. You can also find us on our Facebook Page and @govtrack on Twitter. You are encouraged to reuse any material on this site. GovTrack is open source and supports open knowledge; see the developers page.