If act in question -really- so blatantly, what's the word? Illegal? An obvious violation of basic human/Constitutional rights and international treaties? I doubt it.
I just got one thing to say to you if you think it's not possible, SOPA.
Found it on GovTrack, there's no actual text of the bill, but according to the overview it is:
An original bill 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.
Am I the only one who sees no mention of kidnapping US citizens and holding them indefinitely?
I agree with Nichodemus, there is no way that such a thing is even remotely possible, especially considering that to take hostile action against a person in another country using foreign military forces is tantamount to a declaration of war...
That's not the same "bill" if it even existed. What you gave us is essentially a bill asking for money for military expenditure. Unless the government puts forth a bill or a reliable source shows us such an article I won't believe this nonsense.
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.
The bill I linked/quoted is S. 1867, also known as the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.
Oh for ****s sake, if you read the text of the bill, then it's quite obvious that all of these "sources" have blown the matter out of proportion.
It states the following: (As I understood it.)
Any person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks on 9/11 or gave refuge to the perpetrators, and any person that is a member of the Taliban or Al-Quaeda along with other assorted groups that engaged in hostilities with the US or it's allies is subject to be detained without trial until the end of hostilities or trial under Public Law 111-84. This person may also be transferred for trial to a court with jurisdiction, or transferred back to their nation of origin.
The law doesn't even apply to US citizens or Resident Aliens*.
*In the case of aliens, it depends on what the Constitution permits.
tl;dr
No major media outlets care because the bill is neither radical, nor dictatorial, it's just been blown out of proportion.
Oh for ****s sake, if you read the text of the bill, then it's quite obvious that all of these "sources" have blown the matter out of proportion.
It seems that way because all it outlined was Al-Quaeda/Taliban, but I think the part that could extend to anyone is this:
"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)"
Meaning SoD could change the rule to target any group they don't like.
Brief is the operative word their, to actually change what, or rather who falls under 'covered persons' the bill itself would have to be amended, something that requires legislative action.
Brief is the operative word their, to actually change what, or rather who falls under 'covered persons' the bill itself would have to be amended, something that requires legislative action.
Of course, but the legislature is almost certain to do whatever the SoD advocates. Anyone who won't looks like they're helping out the enemy.
Welcome to the post 9/11 era, the American public is no longer so terrified about every little thing that they're going to cry traitor because Congress doesn't allow the SoD to place *insert random group* under such a restriction.
Somehow, I get the feeling now is a good time to move to Germany. This country is going downhill.
Brief is the operative word their, to actually change what, or rather who falls under 'covered persons' the bill itself would have to be amended, something that requires legislative action
You think the Army can't do things behind the Congress' backs? Think again, this is the U.S. Of A.(rmy)
Wouldn't be surprised if this did end up happening.
