Politics.be - Van de Patriot Act naar de National Defense Authorization Act

Politics.be (https://forum.politics.be/index.php)

- Buitenland (https://forum.politics.be/forumdisplay.php?f=65)

- - Van de Patriot Act naar de National Defense Authorization Act (https://forum.politics.be/showthread.php?t=163991)

Van de Patriot Act naar de National Defense Authorization Act

De VS hebben vele binnenlandse terroristen (nooit tevreden nationalisten).

De Patriot Act kan dit probleem jammer genoeg niet oplossen.

Vandaar dat men een nieuwe wetgeving wil invoeren, de National Defense Authorization Act.

Misschien is een soortgelijke wetgeving ook de oplossing voor alle lastige klanten in Europa. :wink:

Nationale veiligheid boven alles ! Weg met de anti grote regering terroristen.
:twisted:

Big government and big banks RULE ! :thumbsup:

Citaat:

Senate wants martial law in America
Bill Allows Military to Arrest, Permanently Detain, Torture, Kill American Citizens

There is a bill in the US Senate called the National Defense Authorization Act and it could be voted on as early as this week. This bill gives the president the authority to indefinitely imprison American citizens without a court hearing, both domestically and abroad. Senate Bill 1867 is bringing the battlefield to the homeland.

Bron RT : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3t4wgZCO5M

US gulag's in het zicht ?

Jan.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron (Bericht 5833686)

Ik heb al eerder geschreven dat de VS een Nazi-Hitlerstaat is met alleen 1 verschil:

Er zijn aldaar duizenden Hitlers .......

Hoe ging het Amerikaanse volkslied ook al weer... 'Land of the free, home of the brave'? :rofl:

National Defense Authorization Act :hitler:

bvb, "geloofwaardige prominenten" die een nieuw onderzoek naar 9/11 eisen enkele jaartjes de bak in om af te koelen ? En dan eens "testen" of hij/zij zich gebeterd heeft ?

"National Security" gaat boven alles, en al zeker boven eigen doden...

Herinnert me sterk aan de DDR-STASI en hun informanten - verklikkers - netwerk
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministe...aatssicherheit
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Micele (Bericht 5834803)

Nee, iedere opposant van het establishment gaat rechstreeks naar Guantanamo..

In de VS is er meer vrijheid dan in de rest van de wereld.

De National Defense Authorization Act is gewoon een fiscale wet die de budgetten van het ministerie van Defensie bepaald.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Ratatosk (Bericht 5834893)

In de VS is er meer vrijheid dan in de rest van de wereld.

De National Defense Authorization Act is gewoon een fiscale wet die de budgetten van het ministerie van Defensie bepaald.

Maar niet alleen dat...
En die elk jaar opnieuw gestemd en aangepast kan worden...

Staat onder het YT-filmpje:

Citaat:

Senate wants martial law in America

Bill Allows Military to Arrest, Permanently Detain, Torture, Kill American Citizens

There is a bill in the US Senate called the National Defense Authorization Act and it could be voted on as early as this week. This bill gives the president the authority to indefinitely imprison American citizens without a court hearing, both domestically and abroad. Senate Bill 1867 is bringing the battlefield to the homeland.

Citaat:

Er is een wetsvoorstel in de Amerikaanse Senaat en het kan deze week worden gestemd. Dit wetsvoorstel geeft de president de bevoegdheid om voor onbepaalde tijd Amerikaanse burgers gevangen te houden zonder dat een rechter tussenkomt, zowel in binnen-en buitenland.

Ik citeer de titel (.pdf) en wat tekst:

Citaat:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h112-1540
Text of H.R. 1540: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

Download PDF

Jun 6, 2011 - Referred in Senate. This is the text of the bill after moving from the House to the Senate before being considered by Senate committees.

This is the latest version of the bill currently available on GovTrack.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...540rfs.txt.pdf

112TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1540

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 6, 2011
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

AN ACT
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.

Snappie ? ;-)

Alles is gelezen en ik vind niet wat men zegt.

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

Citaat:

a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined–
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.
(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
(c) Implementation Procedures-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.
(2) ELEMENTS- The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:
(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.
(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.
(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a)(2) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation session which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing session.
(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.
(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a)(4) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.
(d) Effective Date- This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.

Zegt genoeg.

Aan Micele, dat laatste klopte, deze sectie hoort erbij. Dus idd iets meer dan een fiscale beslissing.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Dick Tator (Bericht 5834838)

Nee, iedere opposant van het establishment gaat rechstreeks naar Guantanamo..

Inderdaad, en uit dit vebeteringskamp komt niet iedereen beter uit.

Voor de ongelovigen volgende interviews

Battlefield: America - Have the Terrorists Won?
Sen. Rand Paul, (R-Ky.), explains why he is fighting to stop a bill that would codify the detention of American citizens indefinitely by the U.S. Military.

President Could Order Military Arrest & Indefinite Detention Without Trial For US Citizens
S 3081, Indefinite detention, habeas corpus, posse comitatus, military, arbitrary arrest, us citizen, terror suspect, battlefield, Enemy Belligerent Interrogation Detention Prosecution Act, judge napolitano, freedom watch, john mccain, carl levin, lindsey graham

Bringing the War of Terror Home
Rep. Justin Amash, (R-Mich.), explains why he voted against a defense bill that would allow American citizens to be detained by the U.S. Military.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Micele (Bericht 5834803)

National Defense Authorization Act :hitler:

bvb, "geloofwaardige prominenten" die een nieuw onderzoek naar 9/11 eisen enkele jaartjes de bak in om af te koelen ? En dan eens "testen" of hij/zij zich gebeterd heeft ?

"National Security" gaat boven alles, en al zeker boven eigen doden...

Herinnert me sterk aan de DDR-STASI en hun informanten - verklikkers - netwerk
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministe...aatssicherheit
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi

Inderdaad

9_11 TRUTHERS LOCKED UP FOR LIFE UNDER NEW US LAW
FEMA CAMPS WILL BE OPENED SOON EVEN IF YOU ARE A US CITIZEN! A new bill QUIETLY INTRODUCED by congress last week is causing quite a stir among civil liberties groups. The brainchild of senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman, the bill would give the United States government the power to indefinitely detain terror suspects without charge or trial. It would also allow the government to interrogate them for the intelligence value and it doesn't make a distinction between US citizens and non-citizens.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron (Bericht 5835216)

Onzin.

Citaat:

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

Deze act is toch vrij duidelijk.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Ratatosk (Bericht 5835219)

Onzin.

Deze act is toch vrij duidelijk.

Inderdaad, hoe die hard kan je zijn ?
Zelfs 'the white house' is niet opgezet met deze nieuwe wet.

Citaat:

Senate Votes To Let Military Detain Americans Indefinitely, White House Threatens Veto

WASHINGTON -- The Senate voted Tuesday to keep a controversial provision to let the military detain terrorism suspects on U.S. soil and hold them indefinitely without trial -- prompting White House officials to reissue a veto threat.

The measure, part of the massive National Defense Authorization Act, was also opposed by civil libertarians on the left and right. But 16 Democrats and an independent joined with Republicans to defeat an amendment by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) that would have killed the provision, voting it down with 61 against, and 37 for it.

"I'm very, very, concerned about having U.S. citizens sent to Guantanamo Bay for indefinite detention," said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the Senate's most conservative members.

Paul's top complaint is that a terrorism suspect would get just one hearing where the military could assert that the person is a suspected terrorist -- and then they could be locked up for life, without ever formally being charged. The only safety valve is a waiver from the secretary of defense.

"It's not enough just to be alleged to be a terrorist," Paul said, echoing the views of the American Civil Liberties Union. "That's part of what due process is -- deciding, are you a terrorist? I think it's important that we not allow U.S. citizens to be taken."

Democrats who were also concerned about liberties compared the military policing of Americans to the detention of Americans in internment camps during World War II.

"Congress is essentially authorizing the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens, without charge," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who offered another amendment -- which has not yet gotten a vote -- that she said would correct the problem. "We are not a nation that locks up its citizens without charge."

Backers of military detention of Americans -- a measure crafted by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) -- came out swinging against Udall's amendment on the Senate floor earlier Tuesday.

"The enemy is all over the world. Here at home. And when people take up arms against the United States and [are] captured within the United States, why should we not be able to use our military and intelligence community to question that person as to what they know about enemy activity?" Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said.

"They should not be read their Miranda Rights. They should not be given a lawyer," Graham said. "They should be held humanely in military custody and interrogated about why they joined al Qaeda and what they were going to do to all of us."

In criticizing the measure, White House officials said that it would cause confusion and interfere with a counterterrorism effort that has been remarkably successful since Sept. 11, 2001 -- across two administrations.

"It is likely that implementing such procedures would inject significant confusion into counterterrorism operations," the White House argued in a Nov. 17 statement.

Further, it contended:

This unnecessary, untested, and legally controversial restriction of the President's authority to defend the Nation from terrorist threats would tie the hands of our intelligence and law enforcement professionals. Moreover, applying this military custody requirement to individuals inside the United States, as some Members of Congress have suggested is their intention, would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets. We have spent ten years since September 11, 2001, breaking down the walls between intelligence, military, and law enforcement professionals; Congress should not now rebuild those walls and unnecessarily make the job of preventing terrorist attacks more difficult.

A White House official said the administration stands by the veto threat. "We take this very, very seriously," the official said.

Both FBI Director Robert Mueller and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper backed up the White House with letters sent to congressional leaders. Clapper echoed the charge that the measure creates uncertainty and added that it could prevent intelligence operatives from getting critical information from suspects.

And although the measure allows the secretary of defense to waive it, both Mueller and Clapper said that could prove unworkable in the real world.

Mueller added that it could even stop the FBI from investigating individuals who fall under the definitions of suspected terrorist in the measure.

The 2012 National Defense Authorization Act would authorize defense spending on military personnel, weapons and war. The first draft of the bill won support from both parties in Congress in October, passing out of the Senate Armed Services Committee with just Udall dissenting. A similar House bill allocating $690 billion for the Pentagon passed in May, without the controversial measure. It could be changed when the differing versions are merged, if Congress desires.

The detention provision whipped up a furor in both parties, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) having already text delayed the vote over it.

...

huffingtonpost

Op volgende site kan U iets meer lezen over de vaagheid van de wetgeving hieromtrent.

Vergeet niet : Iedere vorm van vaagheid leidt in beginsel tot rechts onzekerheid ! :roll:

Citaat:

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.

***
washingtonsblog congress-to-vote-next-week-on-explicitly-creating-a-police-state.html

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Ratatosk (Bericht 5835219)

Onzin.

Deze act is toch vrij duidelijk.

Blijkbaar gaat dat over een andere act (wetsvoorstel of bill), ik vind wel het verband niet met die eerste bill:
(was bij YT-link)
Hochgeladen von redhawkmessenger am 07.05.2011

FEMA CAMPS WILL BE OPENED SOON EVEN IF YOU ARE A US CITIZEN! A new bill QUIETLY INTRODUCED by congress last week is causing quite a stir among civil liberties groups. The brainchild of senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman, the bill would give the United States government the power to indefinitely detain terror suspects without charge or trial. It would also allow the government to interrogate them for the intelligence value and it doesn't make a distinction between US citizens and non-citizens.

Full list of FEMA camps-
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/camps.htm

>>> deze : The Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010-

http://assets.theatlantic.com/static...s/ARM10090.pdf

Citaat:

http://assets.theatlantic.com/static...s/ARM10090.pdf

111TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
llllllllll
Mr. MCCAIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on ...................

A BILL

To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010’’.

1 SEC. 2. PLACEMENT OF SUSPECTED UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY
2 BELLIGERENTS IN MILITARY CUSTODY.

3 (a) MILITARY CUSTODY REQUIREMENT.—Whenever
4 within the United States, its territories, and possessions,
5 or outside the territorial limits of the United States, an
6 individual is captured or otherwise comes into the custody
7 or under the effective control of the United States who
8 is suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United
9 States or its coalition partners through an act of ter
10 rorism, or by other means in violation of the laws of war,
11 or of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities,
12 and who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent, the
13 individual shall be placed in military custody for purposes
14 of initial interrogation and determination of status in ac15
cordance with the provisions of this Act.

16 (b) REASONABLE DELAY FOR INTELLIGENCE AC
17 TIVITIES.—An individual who may be an unprivileged
18 enemy belligerent and who is initially captured or other
19 wise comes into the custody or under the effective control
20 of the United States by an intelligence agency of the
21 United States may be held, interrogated, or transported
22 by the intelligence agency and placed into military custody
23 for purposes of this Act if retained by the United States
24 within a reasonable time after the capture or coming into
25 the custody or effective control by the intelligence agency,
26 giving due consideration to operational needs and require-
1 ments to avoid compromise or disclosure of an intelligence
2 mission or intelligence sources or methods.

3 SEC. 3. INTERROGATION AND DETERMINATION OF STATUS
4 OF SUSPECTED UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BEL5
LIGERENTS.
...]

March 4, 2010 (12:06 p.m.)

De eerste act of "National Defense Authorization Act"
vondt de volgende congresszitting plaats
112TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION H. R. 1540

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron (Bericht 5835216)

russia today woehahaha:lol::lol:

Amerika uitroepen als Nazii-Hitlerstaat is een dringende noodzakelijkheid en zal politici dwingen alle niet zakelijke contacten te negeren.

Eveneens - gezien de wetgeving - moet de VS uit de VN worden gezet. Het land moet beschouwd worden als vijand no 1 van de wereld.

Paniek en paranoia in New Jersey vanwege een vals alarm via GSM operator Verizon. "civil emergency & take shelter"

Citaat:

Verizon says 'civil emergency' alert in N.J. was only a test; company apologizes for 'inconvenience'

A mass text message warning New Jersey cell phone users of a "civil emergency" was sent out by Verizon Wireless earlier today as part of a "test emergency notification," the telecommunications company said.

In a response statement issued about two hours after the mass text was sent out, alarming some Garden State residents, Verizon Wireless apologized to its customers.

"This test message was not clearly identified as a test," company spokesman David Samberg said in an e-mailed statement to The Star-Ledger. "We apologize for any inconvenience or concern this message may have caused."

The emergency alert was sent out to New Jersey phone users in Monmouth, Ocean and Middlesex counties earlier this afternoon, citing a "civil emergency in this area until 1:24 p.m." and telling residents to "take shelter now."

Local police departments and county authorities said they received a high volume of 911 calls from residents concerned about the alerts and asking whether there was an actual emergency.

...

Why anxiety is good for you... ;-)