Obama Signs NDAA Martial Law - General

Wait. What is going on? I'm not trying to be funny, I just don't leave the house. What is the NDAA Martial Law?

What the fuck is going on in this country? Who do I have to call to get my constitutional rights back? Or do I need to be a federal employee to have those? I'm going to start carrying the U.S. Constitution in my pocket at all times. I never thought that I might see another civil war.

We welcome everyone to Canada. Free Health care awaits you.

id like to say come to Canada but really, its no better, Canada is Americas bitch if something happens in America it will affect canada. But come to Canada, torrenting music is legal

Next time it'll be SOPA if we don't do something to prevent it

FYI that quote from Obama about the Constitution being imperfect refers to the fact that slavery was still a thing in the 1700s. [url]http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/obama-constitution/2008/10/27/id/326165[/url] [url]http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/10/obama_constitut.html[/url] [url]http://www.newshounds.us/2009/09/18/glenn_becks_witch_hunt_of_the_day_deceptively_edits_obamas_remarks_about_constitution_to_suggest_he_doesnt_like_it.php[/url] [url]http://mediamatters.org/research/200810280007[/url] [editline]17th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Strikelol;33776039]Wait. What is going on? I'm not trying to be funny, I just don't leave the house. What is the NDAA Martial Law?[/QUOTE] Very basically, the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) is a federal US law that is passed annually; it deals with the Department of Defense's budget. The NDAA for 2012 added two [I]highly[/I] controversial sections, allowing for indefinite detention of US Citizens without trial or hearing (and military detention of non-citizens) that are a part of terrorist groups. [sub][sub]Section 1031 States: (a) In General.--Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war. (b) Covered Persons.--A covered person under this section is any person as follows: (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks. (2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces. (c) Disposition Under Law of War.--The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following: (1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force. (2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)). (3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction. (4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity. (d) Construction.--Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force. (e) Authorities.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States. (f) Requirement for Briefings of Congress.--The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be ``covered persons for purposes of subsection (b)(2).[/sub][/sub]

[QUOTE=yuper11;33776739]id like to say come to Canada but really, its no better, Canada is Americas bitch if something happens in America it will affect canada. But come to Canada, torrenting music is legal[/QUOTE] I wouldn't go as far as to say Canada does everything the US does. We are and always will be more liberal than the US. Although not so liberal that we come off as hippies.

NDAA : "Indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without a trial or hearing" Hold on did this sort of thing happen in the Soviet Union? Whats wrong America? The whole fear of the "communists" just consume you? Except you becoming the Soviet Union? Just more fucked up with the technology we have and with SOPA on its way? You know why communism never worked for the Soviet Union? Because of greed. You know why democracy isn't working out right now for USA? Because of greed. Whether the government takes your money to make it fair for all - then screw you overtime with unfair laws.. Or big companies that take your money then give it to the government so that the laws are only FAIR for the 1%.. Money/Greed source of all evil.. Oh wait - that discovery was already made by somebody..

[QUOTE=peepin;33776916]NDAA : "Indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without a trial or hearing" Hold on did this sort of thing happen in the Soviet Union? Whats wrong America? The whole fear of the "communists" just consume you? Except you becoming the Soviet Union? Just more fucked up with the technology we have and with SOPA on its way? You know why communism never worked for the Soviet Union? Because of greed. You know why democracy isn't working out right now for USA? Because of greed. Whether the government takes your money to make it fair for all - then screw you overtime with unfair laws.. Or big companies that take your money then give it to the government so that the laws are only FAIR for the 1%.. Money/Greed source of all evil.. Oh wait - that discovery was already made by somebody..[/QUOTE] it's not communists, we're pretty much over communists and only joke about it for the most part. it's the generic terrorists that america's panties are in a wad about

This has nothing to do with communists...

This is some straight up bullshit.

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;33776922]it's not communists, we're pretty much over communists and only joke about it for the most part. it's the generic terrorists that america's panties are in a wad about[/QUOTE] It isn't terrorists, they're just using them as a scapegoat to pass most of these bullshit laws.

[QUOTE=Keyblockor;33776949]It isn't terrorists, they're just using them as a scapegoat to pass most of these bullshit laws.[/QUOTE] in the population I mean. congress doesn't give a fuck about anything we want and just pass a bunch of shit under the guise of fighting for freedom

[QUOTE=yuper11;33776739]id like to say come to Canada but really, its no better, Canada is Americas bitch if something happens in America it will affect canada. But come to Canada, torrenting music is legal[/QUOTE]We aren't doing everything like the US.

[QUOTE=peepin;33776916]NDAA : "Indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without a trial or hearing"[/QUOTE] [release](b) Covered Persons.--A covered person under this section is any person as follows: (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks. (2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported [B]al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces[/B] that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces. [/release] Remember, the Bill doesn't state "Any American citizen may be held in detention indefinitely without a trial or hearing." It states that those tied to terrorist groups responsible for 9/11 may be. Does that make it okay? [I]No.[/I] [release]SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY. (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.[/release] [editline]17th December 2011[/editline] Note that the NDAA holds no power over 'lone wolf' terrorists, only those tied to major groups. I'm not defending the Act, I'm just reading it.

[QUOTE=Corndog Ninja;33777076][release](b) Covered Persons.--A covered person under this section is any person as follows: (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks. (2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported [B]al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces[/B] that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces. [/release] Remember, the Bill doesn't state "Any American citizen may be held in detention indefinitely without a trial or hearing." It states that those tied to terrorist groups responsible for 9/11 may be. Does that make it okay? [I]No.[/I] [release]SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY. (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.[/release] [editline]17th December 2011[/editline] Note that the NDAA holds no power over 'lone wolf' terrorists, only those tied to major groups. I'm not defending the Act, I'm just reading it.[/QUOTE] Well, I guess I feel a TINY bit better.

[QUOTE=Corndog Ninja;33777076][release](b) Covered Persons.--A covered person under this section is any person as follows: (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks. (2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported [B]al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces[/B] that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces. [/release] Remember, the Bill doesn't state "Any American citizen may be held in detention indefinitely without a trial or hearing." It states that those tied to terrorist groups responsible for 9/11 may be. Does that make it okay? [I]No.[/I] [release]SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY. (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.[/release] [editline]17th December 2011[/editline] Note that the NDAA holds no power over 'lone wolf' terrorists, only those tied to major groups. I'm not defending the Act, I'm just reading it.[/QUOTE] If you can say for absolute certain that Homeland Security doesn't overlook it, I might feel better. After seeing that episode of Conspiracy Theory, I honestly don't want to live in this country anymore.

IMO, after all of this I'm starting to debate who's worse: Obama or Bush? First this TSA crap and now the NDAA. Call me a nutter, but I think he's worse. Off to Sweden! (no really, I'm leaving this shithole when I'm done with highschool).

Come to New Zealand, The government is too worried about trivial bullshit like fucking handshakes to care about anything like this. We won the "least corrupt country" award, and we have the lowest torture rates. Average daily press coverage incudes, The RWC, The prime minister fucking up a hand shake, The prime minister's son planking, science, some old asshole raging, some poor people fucked over needing help, old as fuck viral videos, AND THE LIST GOES ON! Our anti piracy laws don't do shit unless a company physically makes a claim. Our South is as smart as the North. No fox news. Next to no soccer moms. Comedy Central is only censored at night. We prefer true blood to twilight. [url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/4888075/No-one-shows-up-for-Biebers-film]NO ONE SHOWED UP FOR JUSTIN BEIBER'S FILM.[/url] New Zealand comedy.

And so it has begun... [editline]18th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Corndog Ninja;33777076] Note that the NDAA holds no power over 'lone wolf' terrorists, only those tied to major groups. [/QUOTE] They always suspect any kind of terrorism to be part of a bigger scheme. They never go like. "Oh this is probably the act of one single individual." So if they want, they can throw the individual in jail. They can do what they want.

[QUOTE=Ermac20;33774209]heres a good idea just overthrow your government[/QUOTE] There's a slight problem with that... [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/M1A1.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Nikota;33777700]There's a slight problem with that... [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/M1A1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] not unless some of the higher ups are smart enough to side with the people

[QUOTE=Dog;33777666]Come to New Zealand, The government is too worried about trivial bullshit like fucking handshakes to care about anything like this. We won the "least corrupt country" award, and we have the lowest torture rates. Average daily press coverage incudes, The RWC, The prime minister fucking up a hand shake, The prime minister's son planking, science, some old asshole raging, some poor people fucked over needing help, old as fuck viral videos, AND THE LIST GOES ON! Our anti piracy laws don't do shit unless a company physically makes a claim. Our South is as smart as the North. No fox news. Next to no soccer moms. Comedy Central is only censored at night. We prefer true blood to twilight. [url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/4888075/No-one-shows-up-for-Biebers-film]NO ONE SHOWED UP FOR JUSTIN BEIBER'S FILM.[/url] New Zealand comedy.[/QUOTE] and Middle Earth

[QUOTE=RidingKeys;33774341]Haha yes, I am completely correct. An officer is allowed to disobey any order given by the president that violates the Constitution of the United States of America. Fuck going to your senators, e-mail generals and officers.[/QUOTE] This fills me with an unbelievably immense sense of hope for my country. How bad ass would it be if a General to disobeyed a direct Presidential order on these grounds?

I don't think (and severely hope) most of our military grunts don't have the heart to obey laws that imprison US citizens for no good reason.

[QUOTE=Nikota;33777700]There's a slight problem with that... [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/M1A1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Like the above quote says, Generals are duty-bound to disobey the President if he orders them to break Constitutional Rights. It would be the Civil War all over again.

[url=http://www.cracked.com/article_19363_6-reasons-your-plans-to-move-abroad-might-not-work-out.html]6 Reasons Your Plans to Move Abroad Might Not Work Out[/url]

[QUOTE=Protocol7;33777811]I don't think (and severely hope) most of our military grunts don't have the heart to obey laws that imprison US citizens for no good reason.[/QUOTE] Are you saying that grunts would or wouldn't disobey the NDAA?

[QUOTE=Nick Lomax;33777682]They always suspect any kind of terrorism to be part of a bigger scheme. They never go like. "Oh this is probably the act of one single individual." So if they want, they can throw the individual in jail. They can do what they want.[/QUOTE] There have been [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_wolf_%28terrorism%29#Lone_wolves_in_the_United_States]at least eight[/url] instances of Lone Wolf terrorism in the USA since 9/11, and perhaps some of the most well-known terrorists (Unabomber, Oklahoma City) were also lone wolves.

Does the Bill of Rights or the Constitution even mean anything to these bastards? Removing almost all the freedom they can from us. Everything our Founding Fathers wanted for the country is going the opposite. We're now being run by corporate whores and crappy politicians. I had respect for Obama, but now that hes going for passing SOPA and the NDAA, I'm starting to lose hope VERY fast. Obama was one of the only people I had hope for being in presidency. But now, I'm going to have to think twice before I vote for him.