Is the Defense Auth Act a shot across the bow of OWS?

[rhett o rick]

Although the President already has the power*, the Defense Auth Act sets to make it a little more legal. I say it like that because how can something be legal that clearly violates the Constitution.

Senate passes Defense Authorization Act with vote of 93 – 7 which includes provisions authorizing the President to arrest anyone anywhere that is suspected of terrorism and hold indefinitely (until the end of the war on terror).
“The legislation also would deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention.”

(Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/AP-sources-Obama-makes-push-to-change-terror-bill-2391732.php#ixzz1g8pkHINe )

IMO the loose definitions of “suspected terrorism” via the Patriot Act would cover some activities of OWS.

*Bush set the precedent for this when Jose Pidilla was grabbed off the streets in the USofA and held without due process for years. Some believe he was tortured into insanity. I heard (don’t have the source) that the courts ruled that Bush had the authority to detain terrorist suspects as he did with Mr. Pidilla.

Can you imagine this power in the hands of The Newt?

If someone can lead me to who actually voted against this in the Senate, I would appreciate it. My search ability is not too great.

[Itchinjim]

1. No.

[rhett o rick]

8. I would love to hear your thoughts? You think the Pres should sign the bill? nm

[Leopolds Ghost]

19. Don't worry, it only applies to the terra-ists. We get to draw up exemptions to our own rules

Right?

[Fumesucker]

2. Yes.

[OnyxCollie]

3. 110,000 Japanese Americans say, "Yes." nt

[SidDithers]

5. That was FDR, right?...

And I read so often how DUers want Obama to be more like FDR.

Sid

[Itchinjim]

7. Ha!

[Citizen Worker]

4. Nixon's enemies list comes to mind.

[SidDithers]

6. No...nt

Sid

[Rex]

9. Wow, that 9% Congress just cannot wait to shed those pesky numbers!

I think they want to get down to a 0% approval rating! No, not a shot but still a really stupid thing to do...but not a surprise out of Congress.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Not to worry. Obama is absolutlly, for sure, going to veto it.

At least that's what he and his supporters say.

Or, will he "compromise" and then claim victory?

[bengalherder]

11. Therin lies the rub.

[rhett o rick]

14. But for the correct reasons? See link.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=439&topic_id=2455086

[GReedDiamond]

12. Here are the No votes:

Coburn (R-OK), Harkin (D-IA), Lee, (R-UT), Merkley (D-OR), Paul (R-KY), Sanders (I-VT), Wyden (D-OR).

The full roll call may be seen here:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00218

[rhett o rick]

13. Thank you so much. nm

[bvar22]

15. “suspected terrorism”

..can cover anything they want it to cover.

I don't believe this was a response to OWS specifically.
This was simply the next logical step in building a more powerful Unitary Executive.


I'm glad I remember when the following video clip was a joke that evoked ridicule and derision:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejvyDn1TPr8

NOW, it evokes FEAR.
The operant word is "SUSPECTED".
An American no longer needs to DO something to be deprived of all rights.
All the government needs now is the SUSPICION that an individual may do something.
The Unitary Executive does not even have to produce evidence to justify that suspicion to anyone.

This goes way beyond direct activity.
Under the Patriot Act, anyone who did anything that may possibly be construed as helping a terrorist
was guilty of Terrorism. This would include ties or indirect association with any organization that indirectly provided funds that eventually might find their way to "Terrorist Organizations."
There is no limit on the Degrees of Separation.

One does NOT have to be guilty of aiding a terrorist.
One only has to be "suspected".

It simply means anything they want it to mean.
There IS no appeal.
There IS no oversight.




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Electric Monk]

17. Are you missing a finger? You're a suspect. More than a week's worth of food? You're a suspect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel#Early_and_personal_life

[rhett o rick]

18. I would like to see the source of your criteria for being a terrorist "suspect".

I heard it on TV but would like to get the source. I want to tell TeaBaggers that they qualify as terrorist "suspects" and Obama wants to be able to arrest them without due process.

[Leopolds Ghost]

20. The bill says SUSPICION of Terrorism? Does anyone care to comment on this

Here or on DU3? Are threads about this allowed on DU3?

[rhett o rick]

21. There is not much to say. Our government, whether under Democrat or Republicon

control want to bypass the Constitution and give the President powers to arrest and detain literally anyone he wants without due process. End of story.

[aletier_v]

16. Predicted in "The Great Reckoning", Davidson, 1991

James Davidson predicted that as the depression continued, the US government would eventually resemble the Spanish Inquisition towards the end of its days.