Treasonous Bill Passed by Senate Today

[fd15k]

So how come Mcain, when asked if it would extend to American citizens, didnt say no?

He just hasn't read it yet Remember how it was with the Patriot Act ?

 

[fd15k]

I think 1031 (e) is another important piece :

(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.

 

[Trlsmn]

Thank you, now we are debating with facts not hype and propaganda!

 

[Gunner3456]

I have read the bill instead of internet panic about it. It excludeds American Citizens, as quoted above.

Not, only that, but the bill WAS DEFEATED IN THE SENATE TWO DAYS AGO, THANKS TO PAUL RAND.

LINK

Ya'll can unwad your panties now. We all know this would have been jumped all over and beaten at the SC if it had been what the internet posers said it was.

 

[slimmer13]

He just hasn't read it yet Remember how it was with the Patriot Act ?

Didnt him and Levin write it? And didnt the senate vote on like the 29th to strike the portion that includes American citizens but that failed? What am I missing?

 

[Gunner3456]

 

[fd15k]

Didnt him and Levin write it? And didnt the senate vote on like the 29th to strike the portion that includes American citizens but that failed? What am I missing?

I believe it was Justice Department who produced it :

The Act itself came about after the September 11th attacks on New York City and the Pentagon. After these attacks, Congress immediately started work on several proposed antiterrorist bills, before the Justice Department finally drafted a bill called the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001.

USA PATRIOT Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[slimmer13]

I have read the bill instead of internet panic about it. It excludeds American Citizens, as quoted above.

Not, only that, but the bill WAS DEFEATED IN THE SENATE TWO DAYS AGO, THANKS TO PAUL RAND.

LINK

Ya'll can unwad your panties now. We all know this would have been jumped all over and beaten at the SC if it had been what the internet posers said it was.

Internet Posers? This is from your own link that looks like its from paul's site.

(S.1867), amendment No. 1274 would have allowed the U.S. government to detain an American citizen indefinitely, even after they had been tried and found not guilty, until Congress declares an end to the war on terror.

 

[fd15k]

Internet Posers? This is from your own link that looks like its from paul's site.

This is the list of Amendments proposed for 1867 :

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdque...[1-381](Amendments_For_S.1867)&./temp/~bdYrVx

I can't find 1274 in there. Do you have a link to the text of that amendment ?

 

[Gunner3456]

Internet Posers? This is from your own link that looks like its from paul's site.

(S.1867), amendment No. 1274 would have allowed the U.S. government to detain an American citizen indefinitely, even after they had been tried and found not guilty, until Congress declares an end to the war on terror. .

That was a proposed amendment, but it didn't pass. It went down in flames in the Senate on Dec. 2, 41-59 thanks to Rand Paul.

It's amazing how people will jump on an internet rumor.

 

[slimmer13]

Ok so until this amendment was defeated which I totally didnt know about then do you agree that we should have had our "panties in a wad"?

 

[Gunner3456]

This is the list of Amendments proposed for 1867 :

(Amendments_For_S.1867)&./temp/~bdYrVx]Bill Summary & Status Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

I can't find 1274 in there. Do you have a link to the text of that amendment ?

<broken link removed>

 

[fd15k]

Ok so until this amendment was defeated which I totally didnt know about then do you agree that we should have had our "panties in a wad"?

We can't panic every time some crazy Senator introduces an amendment to a bill (harmless in its own) in consideration to take away our freedoms. If you use the link above, you can see there are tons of amendments in different stages of consideration. Only when a complete amended (read dangerous) bill makes it out into the House, that's when we can start worrying Of course it would be nice if the people who voted for those dudes kept an eye on them, and recall them when they pull a stunt like that. But as long as the people vote on single issues (see Newt thread), I doubt that will happen.

 

[fd15k]

<broken link removed>

My bad, I wasn't paying attention. Here it is :

Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - S.AMDT.1274 - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

And for the curious, here is the roll call :

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00217

Note how most of Yea's have letter "R" in front....

 

[slimmer13]

All ive got to say is thank god for Rand Paul.

 

[Gunner3456]

Well there is still the rest of the bill which sucks, but I don't think it will pass the House. The Senate and House will begin committee negotiations on what's left, and it should get trimmed some more. I hope.

 

[Gunner3456]

My bad, I wasn't paying attention. Here it is :

Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - S.AMDT.1274 - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

And for the curious, here is the roll call :

U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote

Note how most of Yea's have letter "R" in front....

Inhofe who proposed it, and those who voted for it, should be hanged in public.

 

[Brown Trout]

Oh my........

Gunner, you might want to work on setting your own stuff straight before you set to work on others.

I have read the bill instead of internet panic about it. It excludeds American Citizens, as quoted above.
The subsection posted from section 1032 does not apply to 1031 which is the section everyone here is talking about. To be fair and intellectually honest, section 1031, IMO, does not clearly allow for the detention of U.S. citizens, but it does not clearly disallow it either. There is much debate going on about that now, which just further proves the ambiguity about the wording.

Not, only that, but the bill WAS DEFEATED IN THE SENATE TWO DAYS AGO, THANKS TO PAUL RAND.
The bill was not defeated. It has passed. Maybe a proper understanding of the way our legislative branch functions would have served you well in this instance. What was defeated was a nasty amendmant that was unambiguous in it's intentions. It was defeated through an objection by Rand Paul that forced a roll call vote. By the way, John McCain voted for it, and he also sponsered S.1867.


LINK


Ya'll can unwad your panties now. We all know this would have been jumped all over and beaten at the SC if it had been what the internet posers said it was.

 

[fd15k]

Oh my........

Gunner, you might want to work on setting your own stuff straight before you set to work on others.

No need to pick on anybody. This is what we're doing here - trying to figure out what's going on.

 

[Gunner3456]

Oh my........

Gunner, you might want to work on setting your own stuff straight before you set to work on others.

I don't think you read my post #77.

"Well there is still the rest of the bill which sucks, but I don't think it will pass the House. The Senate and House will begin committee negotiations on what's left, and it should get trimmed some more. I hope."