Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: NDAA: The Biggest Election Issue No One's Talking About

  1. -1
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,147
    vCash:
    7569
    Thanks / No Thanks

    NDAA: The Biggest Election Issue No One's Talking About

    You don't have to live alone in the woods, reading issues of Guns and Ammo and co-writing your manifesto with beard lice, to be terrified about the state of basic freedoms in America today. Given the counterterrorism provisions in the fairly recent National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), we currently live in a country where the government can pick up American citizens and detain them indefinitely without access to a lawyer or even a criminal trial. That means locked up forever without even the basic protections we afford to rapists and murderers.

    "That can't be right," you say. "Such a power would be completely unconstitutional!"

    And you're right. Even President Obama said he had "serious reservations with certain provisions [of the bill] that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists." And then he signed it.

    Getty

    "I'll sign my name, but I'm not gonna draw a smiley face in the O like usual."
    But the point is not just to beat up on the president. After all, Governor Romney did that for 90 minutes in last Wednesday's debate without a single mention of these NDAA provisions. That's because the NDAA will persist under a Romney administration as well. That's right: Regardless of who wins in November, your lingering notions of living in a country that is free and democratic can best be described as "quaint" and "wrong."

    So considering that this law alters our concept of what it even means to live in a democracy, why is no one talking about it? Why does no one seem to care? There are three major reasons, but first, let's talk about what the NDAA is.

    What Is the NDAA?

    The primary role of the NDAA is to provide for the Defense Department's budget, which this year amounts to a cozy $662 billion. However, the NDAA also contains counterterrorism provisions in sections 1021 and 1022 that allow the federal government to imprison any person "who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaida, the Taliban or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners" until "the end of the hostilities."

    Did that clear it up for you? No? See, that's part of the problem. The NDAA is so poorly defined that it becomes a bit of an inkblot test for its possible effect. But the thing is, when it comes to basic, constitutionally protected, fundamental freedoms, we typically don't take an "Ahh, y'know what I mean" approach. What we do know is, pursuant to the NDAA, American citizens on American soil can be jailed indefinitely without the right to legal counsel if suspected of being a terrorist. And as Senator Rand Paul has pointed out, there are already all sorts of things on the books that can make you a suspect, such as missing fingers or having more than a week's worth of food in your house.

    So, here we are in a tight election, and none of the candidates or pundits are talking about the one issue that's at the heart of the role of government and our rights as citizens. Why?





    "Politics is the Art of Looking for Trouble, Finding it Everywhere, Diagnosing it Incorrectly, and Applying the Wrong Remedies"
    Quote Quote  

  2. -2
    phins_4_ever's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Oct 2008
    Posts:
    4,681
    vCash:
    36494
    Thanks / No Thanks
    I was wondering why that black helicopter was hovering above my house. Now I know. Thanks.
    Quote Quote  

  3. -3
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,129
    vCash:
    36913
    Thanks / No Thanks
    A horrible law. Has anyone actually been detained under it yet? An article I found from May says no one had yet.

    Should be interesting (and very important, obviously) to see how all the legal challenges end up. The conservative judges on the Supreme Court (and conservative judges in general) usually side with law enforcement on these kinds of issues, but it's hard to imagine that such a threat to due process and liberty could fall under anything but a strict scrutiny test, which this law would obviously fail, imo.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -4
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,147
    vCash:
    7569
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by phins_4_ever View Post
    I was wondering why that black helicopter was hovering above my house. Now I know. Thanks.

    Keep on carrying the water.
    Quote Quote  

  5. -5
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,147
    vCash:
    7569
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    A horrible law. Has anyone actually been detained under it yet? An article I found from May says no one had yet.

    Should be interesting (and very important, obviously) to see how all the legal challenges end up. The conservative judges on the Supreme Court (and conservative judges in general) usually side with law enforcement on these kinds of issues, but it's hard to imagine that such a threat to due process and liberty could fall under anything but a strict scrutiny test, which this law would obviously fail, imo.
    The law has been back and fourth in the courts with Obama and company vigorously defending and appealing it. Not really a "conservative" thing when it was Obama himself who requested it.

    [youtube]4DNDHbT44cY[/youtube]

    Fact is both sides hate our liberties.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -6
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,129
    vCash:
    36913
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphins9954 View Post
    The law has been back and fourth in the courts with Obama and company vigorously defending and appealing it. Not really a "conservative" thing when it was Obama himself who requested it.

    [youtube]4DNDHbT44cY[/youtube]

    Fact is both sides hate our liberties.
    Conservative judges, dude. Judges. Different lines of judicial thought define our liberties and the laws that threaten them in different ways.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -7
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,147
    vCash:
    7569
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    Conservative judges, dude. Judges. Different lines of judicial thought define our liberties and the laws that threaten them in different ways.
    How do you DEFINE Obama's request for such a law???
    Quote Quote  

  8. -8
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,129
    vCash:
    36913
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphins9954 View Post
    How do you DEFINE Obama's request for such a law???
    What do you mean, request? My understanding is he signed it reluctantly.

    Anyway, I don't like the provision. At all. I made that clear.

    But the fate of the law now lies primarily with the courts. Different lines of judicial thought are a relevant part of this discussion and one I was trying to engender, rather than just focusing on "woe is us with these politicians" kinds of commentary.
    Quote Quote  

  9. -9
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,147
    vCash:
    7569
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    What do you mean, request? My understanding is he signed it reluctantly.

    Anyway, I don't like the provision. At all. I made that clear.

    But the fate of the law now lies primarily with the courts. Different lines of judicial thought are a relevant part of this discussion and one I was trying to engender, rather than just focusing on "woe is us with these politicians" kinds of commentary.
    According to Carl Levin in the youtube video above. It was Obama himself who requested the law. The reluctance part was political drama.
    Quote Quote  

  10. -10
    Buddy's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    3,935
    vCash:
    15632
    Loc:
    Victoria, TX
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Re: NDAA: The Biggest Election Issue No One's Talking About

    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    A horrible law. Has anyone actually been detained under it yet? An article I found from May says no one had yet.

    Should be interesting (and very important, obviously) to see how all the legal challenges end up. The conservative judges on the Supreme Court (and conservative judges in general) usually side with law enforcement on these kinds of issues, but it's hard to imagine that such a threat to due process and liberty could fall under anything but a strict scrutiny test, which this law would obviously fail, imo.
    I don't even think that it can be tried for constitutionality until someone is arrested under it. Sounds like a little WMD to keep hidden until Marshall Law is enacted. I'm with you...it is disgusting!

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. NDAA Passes Senate
    By rob19 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-24-2012, 10:45 PM
  2. Posters that think QB isnt our biggest issue
    By hiphopisdead5 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 09-25-2011, 01:51 PM
  3. Replies: 129
    Last Post: 07-22-2010, 08:37 PM
  4. Single most important issue of this election...
    By PhinPhan1227 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-23-2004, 03:10 AM
  5. Perhaps the biggest roster decision no1 is talking about...
    By FakeSpike13 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-05-2004, 04:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •