Wednesday, November 30, 2011

National Defense Authorization Act Bill-Will it Target Americans

There have been numerous reports going around the internet about this bill, that is believed to be headed for a vote today in the US Senate.

The bills section 1031 is in controversy, many who believe that the US Military is giving broad authorization to "pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. 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,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.


The bills main intention is to authorize the US military to arrest and detain indefinitely, without charge or trial, foreign terrorist and their affiliates. Something that ACLU has been trying to do away with for 6 years now, by demanding the closing of Gitmo and bringing those enemy combatants to the US, to stand trial in a US Criminal court, which that move would give them constitutional protections.


Prison Planet.com did a piece on this a few days ago, and since then, skeptics have been claiming that it's not true.
So a few days later, InfoWars did piece on section 1032 (By Alex Jones, mind you) to quite the skeptics, by quoting Congressman Justin Amash, and that his claim to the language is “carefully crafted to mislead the public”. According to Congressman Amash "that it does not preclude U.S. citizens from being detained indefinitely, without charge or trial, it simply makes such detention discretionary,”
Here is section 1032 which shows :
 
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

4 (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 (see this below) 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) (see this below) , 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, States except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United.
Now, based on the use of the word "requirement" this section cannot be construde to be "discretionary" 


Next-
I present you the wording of Section 1031 National Defense Authorization Act Bill(PDF) and my opinion that the current language of the bill does NOT authorize the US Military to capture and detain American citizens, as claimed by Senator Udall, Rand Paul, Prison Plant and most importantly, the LIBERAL A.C.L.U.! (Bold keywords)

Subtitle D—Detainee Matters



SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.


(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.

So, as this clearly states, a covered person is 'Defined' in section 1031 as A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks AND 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.


But then we have Senator Mark Udall, who proposes an amendment (1107) to this bill that would strike subtitle D(see above) and insert this. (h/t to Scott) Effectively removing the definitions of covered persons.
Why would he do that?


The ACLU has its agenda, and that is to give foreign enemy combatants a day in US court and NOT be held indefinitely as long as hostilities persist, as it so says in the Geneva Convention.
They have raised the flag, but the flag has a Skull & Crossbones on it.

 
 

3 comments:

Mark Adams said...

News Flash Amazingly enough, Senator Udall, who wrote an amendment for this bill that would have taken the American citizen detainment provision off this, voted YES.

Guess he must have READ my post.

Scott said...

Citizens may be detained by the military at any time by the military on a presidential order right now...The language may be changed and other provisions added by the house before debate is ended, but I still don't see this ending well...New post today...Judge Nepolitano weighs in. Thx for the link.

Mark Adams said...

Yes sir they can, as long as it's an attack on the homeland and government. However, speaking with many military people, if the orders came from the president to take action against citizens, on US soil, most of them say they would defy the order, unless the citizens threatens them by pointing a weapon at them. Then all bets are off.