User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 21

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    104

    Default NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act)

    What do you guys, girls, space-aliens and creatures of the lagoon, think about this controversial act?

    Will sections like 1010, 1021, 1031 and 1032, take away our rights as citizens?

    Is there a violation of the 5th amendment?

    Are there any potential consequences to this bill?

    Are there any benefits to this bill?

    Some links to information:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...scal_Year_2012

    http://civilliberty.about.com/b/2011...-2012-ndaa.htm

    http://www.redstate.com/badkarma6/2011/12/26/ndaa-2012/

    http://verdict.justia.com/2011/12/21...-act-explained

  2. #2

    Default

    The Bill's text. It's a beast, but they always are it seems.

    NDAA FAQ: A Guide for the Perplexed gratis the Lawfare Blog.

    What exactly does the NDAA do?

    The NDAA is a spending authorization bill for the military for fiscal year 2012. At more than 1,000 pages, it does a great many things. Almost all of the controversy about it, however, deals with a single portion of the bill: “Subtitle D–Counterterrorism.” This subtitle contains a number of provisions related to military detention of terrorism suspects and the interaction between military detention and the operation of the criminal justice system. Broadly speaking, the controversy relates entirely to the following provisions:

    ((Sections 1021-1028 are broken down in detail...))
    The NDAA is really a codification in statute of the existing authority the administration claims. It puts Congress’s stamp of approval behind that claim for the first time, and that’s no small thing. But it does not–notwithstanding the widespread belief to the contrary–expand it. Nobody who is not subject to detention today will become so when the NDAA goes into effect.

    The one area in which the NDAA could theoretically be said to expand detention authority involves people held on the basis not of membership in an enemy group but mere support for one. As noted above, the government has long claimed this authority already, and the DC Circuit has in fact endorsed a slightly broader formulation. But so far, anyway, it has done so in dicta only–that is, not in any case where the fact pattern actually depended on the resolution of that issue. In theory, then, the circuit (or the Supreme Court) might at some point have concluded that support alone is insufficient to support a detention. The NDAA will ensure that this does not happen by making clear that independent support does count as a ground for detention (or at least it will do so as a matter of statutory interpretation; in theory, the door would remain open to some form of constitutional challenge, though it is difficult to see how that would work). So even as it marginally narrows the detainable class, the NDAA also tends to ensure that courts will not narrow the scope of that class further.
    The preexisting authority that is now getting the Congressional stamp of approval being referred to by Lawfare is from September 18th, 2001: the Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, a direct result of the 9/11 attacks.

    The expansion is a small one, but still uncomfortable to me. I didn't like the indefinite detention allowed before, so to my mind, this is a move in the wrong direction, but not a revolutionary blow to civil liberties as its predecessor was.
    "The purpose of life is to be defeated by greater and greater things." - Rainer Maria Rilke

  3. #3

    Default

    It looks like there's a definite direction in mind anyway, the government wants or thinks it needs to have more powers than it has had already, whatever the reason it makes you wonder how we all managed to survive until now without the state exercising this power.

  4. #4
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    It looks like there's a definite direction in mind anyway, the government wants or thinks it needs to have more powers than it has had already, whatever the reason it makes you wonder how we all managed to survive until now without the state exercising this power.
    Given that you are 3000 miles away I wouldn't expect you to understand why WE Americans survive despite OUR government not having even more tyrannical power.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    Given that you are 3000 miles away I wouldn't expect you to understand why WE Americans survive despite OUR government not having even more tyrannical power.
    Hope your jingoism pays your bills.

  6. #6
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Hope your jingoism pays your bills.
    Jingoism? LOL. Far from it.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  7. #7
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Detaining people indefinitely without due process for possibly even supporting a terrorist organization, opening up American citizens to the same thing used against so-called enemy combatants. It's really very dangerous.

    Personally, I think this fits along quite nicely with SOPA and PIPA. The recurring theme here is that the decision to destroy an abstract concept, be it terror or intellectual piracy, validates unlimited power.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    Jingoism? LOL. Far from it.
    Well stupidity then, if you'd read and understood my post you'd have been able to tell my point was that expanded remits in government didnt seem necessary on the basis of history but no you jumped in with a knee jerk attack on me as a foreign national, it actually should be embarrassing to you that it has to be spelled out for you like this but you will keep displaying your lack of intellect.

    So I take it you Paulistas will be wrapped in the flag and PMSing from here on in?

    I'll may skip this part of the forum until some kind of intelligent life returns.

  9. #9
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Well stupidity then, if you'd read and understood my post you'd have been able to tell my point was that expanded remits in government didnt seem necessary on the basis of history but no you jumped in with a knee jerk attack on me as a foreign national, it actually should be embarrassing to you that it has to be spelled out for you like this but you will keep displaying your lack of intellect.

    So I take it you Paulistas will be wrapped in the flag and PMSing from here on in
    I'll may skip this part of the forum until some kind of intelligent life returns.
    Yes, their was a miscommunication. You're free to think it happened because I'm stupid. That doesn't bother me. The reality is that my experience with you has led me to presume the worst when there are multiple meanings to what you write.

    What does bother me is that for decades the jingoistic and meddling foreign policy of America has entitled foreigners to speak of American politics as if it were their own country. Now a serious non-interventionist presidential candidate is rising, but you, and others like you, can't stop yourself from spewing as much vitriol as possible in his direction.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    Yes, their was a miscommunication. You're free to think it happened because I'm stupid. That doesn't bother me. The reality is that my experience with you has led me to presume the worst when there are multiple meanings to what you write.

    What does bother me is that for decades the jingoistic and meddling foreign policy of America has entitled foreigners to speak of American politics as if it were their own country. Now a serious non-interventionist presidential candidate is rising, but you, and others like you, can't stop yourself from spewing as much vitriol as possible in his direction.
    I was going to simply highlight that and leave it at that, since you know it speaks for itself, but I think I'd add that I'm now "spewing vitriol", exciting and all as that particular spin on things could make this brief exchange I merely posted in response to a thread created on an internet discussion forum, I generally see people posting threads on onine discussion forums as open invitations to discussion, including your despised foreigners who shouldnt have an opinion.

    You really think that US foreign policy is responsible for online discussion forums?

    I think you need to get some perspective, supporting conservative capitalists for rich guys privilege doesnt make you part of any rebellious undertone you know.

Similar Threads

  1. How do you normally identify posts' authors?
    By Brendan in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 11-22-2015, 05:18 PM
  2. NDAA: National Defense Authorization Act of 2012
    By Rail Tracer in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-19-2012, 11:50 PM
  3. National Character?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 12-29-2009, 03:29 PM
  4. Aptitude breakdowns by type (SAT, IQ, ACT)
    By meanlittlechimp in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 11-29-2009, 12:42 AM
  5. A World beyond Politics? A Defense of the Nation-State
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-01-2008, 07:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO