U.S. Senate has just passed a bill that effectively ends the Bill of Rights in America

(LOS ANGELES) - As utterly unfortunate for "freedoms" that generations of Americans, and their allies, have fought and died for, we only have to look at countless bills passed by the senate and the house which have never been read by those who voted for the bills! Therefore, it should come as no surprise that this draconian legislation sits on the presidents desk awaiting the first veto of the Obama administration. That power to veto the legislation is the last straw before the second American revolution.

Those who would put bulls-eyes on our backs will become targets themselves. Even if the bill is vetoed, the education of new generations will bring utter fear into the hearts of all and supress the dreams of our forefathers who would see this attempt as the destruction of the American dream by war mongering politicians and greedy banksters.

Better we close our borders rather than create this utopia of nation destroyers. If American citizens are not safe, no one is. The dreams of free men have turned into nightmares for the world. -
intro by John McCarthy, Salem-News.com correspondent in Los Angeles.

In a stunning move that has civil libertarians stuttering with disbelief, the U.S. Senate has just passed a bill that effectively ends the Bill of Rights in America.

This bill, passed late last night in a 93-7 vote, declares the entire USA to be a "battleground" upon which U.S. military forces can operate with impunity, overriding Posse Comitatus and granting the military the unchecked power to arrest, detain, interrogate and even assassinate U.S. citizens with impunity.

It's being called the most traitorous act ever witnessed in the Senate, and the language of the bill is cleverly designed to make you think it doesn't apply to Americans, but toward the end of the bill it essentially says it can apply to Americans "if we want it to."

...the detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”

The passage of this law is nothing less than an outright declaration of WAR against the American People by the military-connected power elite. If this is signed into law, it will shred the remaining tenants of the Bill of Rights and unleash upon America a total military dictatorship, complete with secret arrests, secret prisons, unlawful interrogations, indefinite detainment without ever being charged with a crime, the torture of Americans and even the "legitimate assassination" of U.S. citizens on right here on American soil!

If you have not yet woken up to the reality of the police state we've been warning you about, I hope you realize we are fast running out of time. Once this becomes law, you have no rights whatsoever in America -- no due process, no First Amendment speech rights, no right to remain silent, nothing.

The mainstream media is engaged in a shameful and conspiratorial news blackout of this entire issue:

Are you getting all this? Do you realize America is about to be overrun by our own military?

The rule of law is about to be utterly destroyed. No due process. No legal representation. Not even a right to know what you're being charged with when you are (indefinitely) detained.

This is an urgent time for action to protest the overreaching military police state in America. Immediately call your representatives in Washington and urge your House members to reject this bill in the reconciliation phase with the Senate. Call the office of the President and urge Obama to veto this bill if it is passed by both houses.

Call your local newspapers and protest this outrageous and traitorous attempt to nullify the entire Bill of Rights.

Do not be fooled by the trolls and disinfo agents who claim this bill does not apply to U.S. citizens -- a fact which has already been established without question. If this is signed into law, military humvees will roll down the streets in U.S. cities, with gunpoint checkpoints, illegal arrests, secret torture operations and the outright murder of U.S. citizens right in their own home towns.

In observing all this, you might ask WHY is this happening right now? Why would the U.S. Senate deliberately nullify the Bill of Rights and seek the authorize military action on the streets of U.S. cities?

The answer, my friends, will not comfort you: A global economic collapse is coming, and once started, it will likely unleash a wave of social unrest and rioting that could burn many U.S. cities to the ground. The U.S. Senate is probably trying to rush authorization of the military to operate in American cities before the economic collapse arrives, thereby placing troops deep within the roughest U.S. cities where they stand a chance at halting the runaway riots that are sure to materialize when peoples' life savings vanish as the banks collapse.

Keep reading NaturalNews.com for updates on this situation. We will continue to cover the Eurozone economic crisis as well as this Senate bill 1867, which is not yet law. Our last-ditch hope would be for Obama to veto it. We'll issue a red alert if that action is needed...

And remember, folks, the Bill of Rights protects us all -- liberals, conservatives, libertarians, agnostics, Christians, Jews, everybody! If you lose the Bill of Rights, you lose America and all the freedoms many generations have fought for. Right now protecting the Bill of Rights is perhaps the single most important thing we can do for our collective futures.

All of us who have been screaming about the importance of the U.S. Constitution have been trying to protect YOU from exactly this kind of scenario. The whole purpose of the Bill of Rights is to limit the power of government so that this kind of Senate action is never allowed.

Special thanks to Salem-News.com's John McCarthy in Los Angeles and Paul de Burgh-Day in Tasmania, Aust.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

rewilding LA: Matilija Dam History and Ecosystems

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Eduardo April 27, 2020 3:57 pm (Pacific time)

Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I provide credit and sources back to your webpage?
My website is in the same niche as yours and my users would definitely benefit from some of the information you present here.
Please let me know if this ok with you. Thank you!
EDITOR: Yes, you may quote our articles/sources.

Anonymous January 4, 2014 1:12 pm (Pacific time)

We the people are great at doing nothing!

wiseman June 26, 2012 8:39 am (Pacific time)

please american senators pass the bill of anti corruption any govenment or leaders. who stolen money should be arested in any where in the world then we can form free poverty world and american will rule the world forever best regards jerusalem jeje wiseman,

PorkNBeans January 6, 2012 12:31 pm (Pacific time)

You have brass bowling balls on the message boards and hide in your million dollar church buildings. Your comments mean nothing. The NWO will not be stopped.

Sue Riley December 21, 2011 1:42 am (Pacific time)

The Defense Authorization Act of 2012

Is The Passed Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (retroactive) To Detain Americans?

The Defense Authorization Act of 2012) appears more threatening to Americans than Hitler's (1933 DISCRIMINATORY LAWS. Hitler's laws set time limits that Germans could be incarcerated for e.g., Serious Disturbance of the Peace and Rioting. But Senators Carl Levin and John McCain’s bill broadly mandates holding Americans indefinitely in Military Custody for being a Belligerent.

Why should anyone be surprised President Obama insisted on indefinite detentions of U.S. Citizens in The Defense Authorization Act? It was widely known that Obama gave a speech in May 2010 at a Security Conference that proposed, incarcerating anyone in indefinite detention without evidence of wrongdoing that government deemed a “combatant” or likely to engage or support a violent act in the future; including U.S. Citizens.

Now that Obama has signed The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, Obama like Hitler, will have the power to arrest members of Congress, drag U.S. Citizens off the street and from their homes to be imprisoned indefinitely based only on Government’s premise someone is a “Combatant” or Belligerent” having or likely to engage in or support a violent act in the future or do something that (might) threaten National Security.

Now that Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, could millions of lawful U.S. activists be subject to indefinite military detention. When you examine Obama’s May 2010 speech, it appears Obama wanted (retroactive power) to incarcerate anyone that government alleged had (prior) committed or supported violent acts on the premise he or she is likely to engage in or support violent acts in the future: some U.S. activists may be vulnerable because no activist knows what other activists or groups they associated or networked did in the past or might do illegally in the future domestically or overseas. U.S. Government need (only allege) a person; group, organization current or former inmate—has committed or might commit a violent act or threaten U.S. National Security to order Indefinite Detention of Americans in military custody with no evidence whatsoever.

Historically when countries have passed police state laws like S.1867, many Citizens abstain from politically speaking out; visiting activists websites or writing comments that might be deemed inappropriate by the Government, i.e. cause someone to be investigated or detained in Military Custody. Are some writers dead-meat with Obama’s signing of S. 1867? It is foreseeable any “American” who writes on the Internet or verbally express an opinion against any entity of U.S. Government or its coalition partners may under the Patriot Act and The Defense Authorization Act of 2012 be deemed by U.S. authorities a “Combatant or Belligerent” or someone likely to engage in, support or provoke violent acts or threaten National Security. U.S. Government can too easily allege an author’s writings inspired Combatant(s) or Belligerent(s) in the past; could in the future or currently, to order an author’s indefinite military detention.

It is problematic that indefinitely detained U.S. Citizens not involved in terrorism or hostile activities, not given Miranda Warnings or allowed legal counsel that are interrogated, will be prosecuted for non-terrorist (ordinary crimes) because of their (alleged admissions) while held in Indefinite Military Detention. Obama will have the power to override the U.S. Constitution. Obama will have the power to detain indefinitely any American without probable cause or evidence. What American will dare speak out against the U.S. government now that Obama has signed The Defense Authorization Act of 2012.

Obama appears to be centralizing the power of federal Government, by getting legislation passed that U.S. government can potentially use to intimidate and threaten any individual or corporation. Hitler got passed similar laws shortly before the burning of the German Parliament building blamed on the communists: immediately after the fire, Hitler used his prior passed police-state laws to coerce corporations and influential Citizens to support passage of fascist legislation e.g., the (1933 DISCRIMINATORY LAWS / DECREE OF THE REICH PRESIDENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE AND STATE that suspended provisions of the German Constitution that protected Citizens’ freedoms and civil liberties. Senators Carl Levin and John McCain’s (Defense Authorization Act of 2012) appears more threatening to Americans than Hitler’ (1933 DISCRIMINATORY LAWS. Hitler’s laws set time limits that Germans could be incarcerated for e.g., Serious Disturbance of the Peace and Rioting. But Senators Carl Levin (D) and John McCain’s ® bill broadly mandates holding Americans indefinitely in Military Custody for being a Combatant or Belligerent. A U.S. Police State Government can use The Defense Authorization Act; and Patriot Act that includes more than 350 civil asset forfeiture laws to threaten or seize the assets of any corporation or individual; to strong-arm U.S. corporations, institutions and others to support government actions including passage of more Police State (Fascist) legislation that will intimidate, threaten and curtail the civil liberties of Americans.

Immediately Below: Compare The 1933 Nazi Decrees with Senators Carl Levin and John McCain’s National Defense Authorization Act of 2012.

1933. ROBL. I 83.

DECREE OF THE REICH PRESIDENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF
THE PEOPLE AND STATE

Note: Based on translations by State Department, National Socialism, 1942 PP. 215-17, and Pollak, J.K., and Heneman, H.J., The Hitler Decrees, (1934), pp. 10-11.7

In virtue of Section 48 (2) of the German Constitution, the following is decreed as a defensive measure against Communist acts of Violence, endangering the state:

Section 1
Sections 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. Thus, restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press, on the right of assembly and the right of association, and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic, and telephonic communications, and warrants for house-searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.

Section 2
If in a state the measures necessary for the restoration of public security and order are not taken, the Reich Government may temporarily take over the powers of the highest state authority.

Section 4
Whoever provokes, or appeals for or incites to the disobedience of the orders given out by the supreme state authorities or the authorities subject to then for the execution of this decree, or the orders given by the Reich Government according to Section 2, is punishable—insofar as the deed, is not covered by the decree with more severe punishment and with imprisonment of not less that one month, or with a fine from 150 up to 15,000 Reichsmarks.

Whoever endangers human life by violating Section 1, is to be punished by sentence to a penitentiary, under mitigating circumstances with imprisonment of not less than six months and, when violation causes the death of a person, with death, under mitigating circumstances with a penitentiary sentence of not less that two years. In addition the sentence my include confiscation of property.

Whoever provokes an inciter to or act contrary to public welfare is to be punished with a penitentiary sentence, under mitigating circumstances, with imprisonment of not less than three months.

Section 5
The crimes which under the Criminal Code are punishable with penitentiary for life are to be punished with death: i.e., in Sections 81 (high treason), 229 (poisoning), 306 (arson), 311 (explosion), 312 (floods), 315, paragraph 2 (damage to railroad properties, 324 (general poisoning).
Insofar as a more severe punishment has not been previously provided for, the following are punishable with death or with life imprisonment or with imprisonment not to exceed 15 years:

1. Anyone who undertakes to kill the Reich President or a member or a commissioner of the Reich Government or of a state government, or provokes to such a killing, or agrees to commit it, or accepts such an offer, or conspires with another for such a murder;
2. Anyone who under Section 115 (2) of the Criminal Code (serious rioting) or of Section 125 (2) of the Criminal Code (serious disturbance of the peace) commits the act with arms or cooperates consciously and intentionally with an armed person;
3. Anyone who commits a kidnapping under Section 239 of the Criminal with the intention of making use of the kidnapped person as a hostage in the political struggle.

Section 6
This decree enters in force on the day of its promulgation.

Reich President
Reich Chancellor
Reich Minister of the Interior
Reich Minister of Justice

Keleste December 19, 2011 4:19 pm (Pacific time)

Why didn't we know this? and why wasn"t it on the news? This is huge, unbeliveable what is going on? I got to this news report by putting "f*ck the senate" in my search engine!

Editor: Keleste, please also see my more recent article: Say Good Bye to the America You Knew, Obama Signed the Defense Bill Thanks for dropping by.

aonoymous December 16, 2011 2:23 pm (Pacific time)

You've got a big problem occurring. And there are only a few main methods of handling this > Go with the flo and elect another snook that will be controlled by the bigger snooks. (Providing martial law isn't invoked and the poles closed). Get the #$@$#$#$#% out of the system !!! Get rid of the system (Look at Romania) Either way you are looking at your toys being taken from you but in one sense you have control while in the other sense you have no control. It's soon time to decide folks !!

Lou K December 14, 2011 3:01 pm (Pacific time)

The bjerk who introduced this bill is treasonous and should be tried, convicted, and sentenced to prison. All those who agree and voted so should be also. let's get rid of all these people and start over !

Anonymous December 13, 2011 6:33 pm (Pacific time)

ITS NOT REAL! They fooled you. The amendment being referred to is "Amendment SA 1107" Google it. it was denied by yea-nay vote. 38-60

papamike69 December 12, 2011 9:39 am (Pacific time)

Remember another time in history that, do to political unrest, people were complacent and believed in a new leader to form a utopian government and followed him blindly. Does the word Nazi ring a bell? I personally believe Obama will not veto this bill but will use it to his full advantage to continue his personal political agenda. If you don't think it could happen here then you have your head stuck in the sand. Complacency Kills... Oh in case I don't get a chance to say this later. I told you so.

pwallen1962 December 10, 2011 10:39 pm (Pacific time)

OK, I agree wholeheartedly, that it is extremely unlikely that our own military and police would ever think of turning against our own civilians, as some other readers have commented. But there IS a force that probably would at the bequest of our government... NATO.

anonymous December 10, 2011 7:32 pm (Pacific time)

Check out bill 1867 Full Martial Law No courts, can hold prisoners indefinately

michael anderson December 9, 2011 11:37 pm (Pacific time)

When it passes,its only designed to hurt the followers of Jesus Chirst our Lord.Sence we are at the end of time the final steps have to be taken to get God's people to agree with the woman who rides the beast.Lets not forget it's a spiritual war we're in.Read Daniel to understand the book of Revelation.Once you know and understand the beast of the past.who and what it is you will see how the USA and the Catholic Church are doing the same thing. Or making an image to the beast That being She, the Mother church make all worship as she says.Plain and simple.Worship God as He ask or worship man.Remember the bible says the whole world will wonder after the beast. Trust Jesus

Anonymous December 9, 2011 11:03 am (Pacific time)

"The list of traitors can be found at info wars."

And FreeRepublic.com. Let's not start and left-vs-right thing here. I think the author of this article is seriously overreacting and trying to get an emotional response from readers, but this kind of Partiot Act-style legislation is definitely wrong-headed and can come back to bite either side of the political spectrum. Why start us-vs-them squabbles when it has nothing to do with that?

Editor: Overreacting about the loss of the Bill of Rights? Is that possible?

Patrick Garrett December 9, 2011 1:02 am (Pacific time)

Dumb move on the goverments part, also landing a stealth aircraft in Iran F@#Kn DUMB DUDES, IF this goes down as planned and American civillions get detaines interrogated or assassinated well im not no damn terrorist i got 2 kids to feed and keep a roof over. Go detain the ones who passed that bill... ITS NOT THE AMERICANS FAULT ITS YOURES.

Daniel December 8, 2011 7:23 pm (Pacific time)

Really nothing new here , its been going on for decades , its called the war on drugs . Pull people out of their beds in the middle of the night and put them in a cage . If they have a legal gun its additional time in the cage . With a lot of selective enforcement ! If there is lots of cash , the suspects may be executed by the corrupt arresting officers and the money stolen . First they came for the pot users and I said nothing because of just say no !

TROY December 8, 2011 6:48 pm (Pacific time)

IT WILL ALWAYS BE THIS WAY BECAUSE HONEST MEN ARE NOT ALOWED TO RUN FOR POLITICAL OFFICE.

Editor: I could not agree more.

M.D. December 8, 2011 5:20 pm (Pacific time)

ANY LOSS OF RIGHTS OR ALTERATIONS TO OUR CONSTITUTION OR BILL OF RIGHTS THAT PUT AMERICANS OR THIER FREEDOMS AT RISK MEAN THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON! AS AN AMERICAN IF NEED BE AS MANY OTHERS BEFORE ME I WILL DEFEND IT AS WRITTEN BY OUR FORE FATHERS. STOP THE INSANITY AND LETS PULL UP OUR BOOT STRAPS AND MAKE DC UNDERSTAND WE'VE HAD IT WITH ALL CRIMINAL ACTIVITY STARTING WITH GETTING CHARGES BROUGHT AGAINST THOSE RESPONCABLE FOR ROBBING THIS COUNTRY BLIND AND DO YOU REALLY WANT THE TSA RAPEING AND MOLESTING OUR WOMEN AS THEY ALREADY ARE IN AIRPORTS XRAY MACHINES THAT ARE NOT FOR HUMANS THAT ARE AT 100 TIMES LEVELS OF THAT OF AN ORDINARY XRAY! IS ANYBODY HOME? IT'S ALL ABOUT MAKING US OBEDIANT SERVANTS 80% OF US ARE SLATTED FOR EXTERMINATION!

Lacerta December 8, 2011 12:31 pm (Pacific time)

United States. Land of the greed and home of the slave.

Meaghen December 8, 2011 12:37 pm (Pacific time)

This is truly scary! Never in my life have I been scared of anything our Government has done or tried to do but this is a travesty. I am ashamed of every single one of them but I thank God I have firearms. If this bill is passed its going to be a mass free for all and a lot of people are going to die needlessly. There about to unleash something and there is going to be no way to take it back. I pray this does not pass because if it does GOD HELP US ALL.

Kyle Marquitz Missouri December 7, 2011 11:02 pm (Pacific time)

Another thing, the government people are also citizen they would NOT take there rights away too not to mention this would be and unconstitutional act!

arlene December 7, 2011 3:57 pm (Pacific time)

WE ELECTED THESE IDIOTS?

Tim December 7, 2011 2:53 pm (Pacific time)

That a way to make the military villians!!! Douche If you got a problem with it don't bash the people that fight for you, just go after the people that approved it.

Mauiplantlady December 5, 2011 11:36 pm (Pacific time)

Maybe that's why there are so many bodybags,food supplies, and what look like internment camps set up all across America. Those stories have been around for awhile with pictures to prove it. God only know what those Morons in Washington are up too.

December 5, 2011 6:22 pm (Pacific time)

I'm former military. I can tell you for a fact that even though all military members take that "enemies both foreign and domestic" at induction into the service you will find very few at all that would point a weapon at a US Citizen. When the politicians and the Generals tell the Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Coast Guard and all the Cops to put US Citizens under the thumb they will refuse. Within hours the US Military will for the most part collapse. People will say no way they will do what they will be ordered to do. NO THEY WILL NOT. The only people US Military forces willingly fill full of holes are enemy forces that are trying to kill them. You send a company force into a neighborhood and some dummy LT order someone to kill civilians and first body to hit the ground will be wearing a military uniform. That's a fact.

Lee Ona December 5, 2011 4:56 pm (Pacific time)

If this is for real and ends our Bill of Rights....God help us!

BERNIE December 7, 2011 12:36 pm (Pacific time)

its not hard to brainwash the young people in the military these days.Hitler,s youth reported on their parents,OH YEH

Sam December 7, 2011 12:03 pm (Pacific time)

I don't understand how anyone can act as thought the Republican's are not somewhat responsible to for this. Don't they control the House? And the Democrats in the Senate are just as bad. And does anyone actually know what socialism is or does it just me "destroy America"?

Weisser Wolf December 7, 2011 11:12 am (Pacific time)

Interesting...what I don't know is WHO is going to enforce this; as a member of the military, I took an oath to defend against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC, not to mention this would be an illegal order, I don't care what this "law" says.

Claud December 7, 2011 10:01 am (Pacific time)

The amendment that is being referred to did not pass. Amendment SA 1107 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 38 - 60. So before causing a panic, should make sure you have all the facts first.

Claud December 7, 2011 9:46 am (Pacific time)

You just failed to mention one thing... Amendment SA 1107 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 38 - 60.

jewamongyou December 7, 2011 8:35 am (Pacific time)

Such a bill cannot exempt "U.S. citizens" any longer and still be effective. Why? Because U.S. citizenship means virtually nothing any more. A Muslim militant is almost as likely to be a "U.S. citizen" as not - so how do you protect the rest of us from those who are?

Editor: Why do we have to still hear that ridiculous accusation? Obama is a disappointment, but he backs Israel, so your accusation typifies the confusion among Americans and little else.

Killcannon December 7, 2011 6:38 am (Pacific time)

You probably want to read the bill itself. Title X, Subtitle D - General Provisions, Detainee Matters. "(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." I.E. It does not apply to U.S. Citizens!

A. Merican December 7, 2011 4:54 am (Pacific time)

The bill would require military custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates and involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. American citizens would be exempt. The bill does allow the executive branch to waive the authority based on national security and hold a suspect in civilian custody. 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. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., had sought an exception to the provision for U.S. citizens, but her effort failed, 55-45.

annonymous December 7, 2011 1:06 am (Pacific time)

what do you think we, the American people, can truly do to prevent this? if the Obama administration is pulling the strings, obviously writing my congressman or calling the white house won't really do anything will it? do you know anything more of this conspiracy? if you aren't at liberty to say i understand. one more thing, what do you think the odds are of a second great depression and second American revolution? also, i hope against a second revolution, the government knows we are weak in this current day and age where we feel safe because we think the law will protect us. none of us are prepared to face the united states military. it will become join or die, i don't think most of you understand the severity of this. if we loose our rights, religion could become outlawed and everyone will be treated as a terrorist, even those born on American soil. it won't matter what race you are, where you're from, if you've been a good or bad person your whole life. no one will care. you're less than a human now. you're a terrorist. at this point, the word terrorist could be stretched to define any type of person. be wary, vague bills are dangerous, for they become laws that can be stretched at the will of the law holders.

veteran December 6, 2011 3:36 pm (Pacific time)

it makes me cringe every time someone tells me 'thank you for defending our freedoms' when they find out i've done 3 combat tours. nothing we did over there contributes to any of our freedoms here. we're just handing out money and hoping it resolves our own political issues because we are terrible at diplomacy. the afghans and other arab states throughout the world are not the ones taking our freedoms from us. our own crappy elected offices are the ones doing it. if i wanted to fight for our freedoms, i would go to capitol hill and start picking people off... THAT'S where our freedoms are being lost.

Me December 6, 2011 2:18 pm (Pacific time)

F... THE GOVERNMENT!

vivian December 6, 2011 12:14 pm (Pacific time)

What the hell r u doing

cPaul December 6, 2011 11:51 am (Pacific time)

12-21-12 the collapse has begun.....

Yeahright December 6, 2011 11:47 am (Pacific time)

Naturalnews.com? Really? The most unreliable, hyperbolic crap on the internet. The facts of this bill are available from any major news outlet - no need to scrape up the bottom of the internet for this stuff.

Editor: I hope you are paid well to be a cheerleader for the government's fascist overtones and the mainstream media sold out up to its eyeballs b the very same groups that have cause this nation's demise. Indeed, venture back to FOX, it is a sheep kind of place. Rah rah!

buktop December 6, 2011 8:37 am (Pacific time)

what is the name of the bill????????? Can't protest if we do not have the name. Thanks!

EDITOR: National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) has been passed by the United States Senate and is under revision by the House of Representatives. The amendment to the Act drafted by U.S. Senator Mark Udall is defined in Title X, Subtitle D, SEC 1031(b) of the bill.

WTF December 6, 2011 2:58 am (Pacific time)

You mention this bill yet you do not give the Bill number there fore I am lead to believe this is a bullsh|t article. I for one want to read this bill if it is real and than I can express my outrage to my ellected officials. I personally know a US Congressman and I asked him about this article and he was dumbstruck at the implications and said no way in hell would this type of bill ever be presented let alone passed.

Gustav December 6, 2011 2:43 am (Pacific time)

If the ACLU is pissed about it this HAS to be good for the US

Karen December 5, 2011 10:17 pm (Pacific time)

I read the bill, I didn't read anything that states anything about losing your rights. I'm more pissed about SOPA than this read the bill: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s1867pcs.pdf

Aaron D. December 5, 2011 10:00 pm (Pacific time)

Can anyone tell me the name of the bill. Sorry if I overlooked it but I'm a bit tired but concerned.

EDITOR: The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) has been passed by the United States Senate and is under revision by the House of Representatives. The amendment to the Act drafted by U.S. Senator Mark Udall is defined in Title X, Subtitle D, SEC 1031(b) of the bill.

flibbertigibbet December 5, 2011 9:33 pm (Pacific time)

NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/us/politics/senate-approves-military-custody-for-terror-suspects.html?scp=1andsq=senate%20approvesandst=cse

MarkC December 5, 2011 6:23 pm (Pacific time)

hitthedeck December 5, 2011 5:38 pm (Pacific time)

Trere was also a left wing proposal to use United Nations forces to put down unrest in America if the Government called for order.

Bronte December 5, 2011 11:43 am (Pacific time)

A prophosy come true: We all live in interesting time!

Anonymous December 5, 2011 10:22 am (Pacific time)

You are completely ignoring the fact that it says Not applicable to US citizens in your article. Then when people post saying that you say it had happened to US citizens, that doesn't mean the bill is giving them the right to do it. People murder people, it has happened, it is still illegal.

M.D. December 5, 2011 7:56 am (Pacific time)

One more thing, any offial who has sworn to uphold our constitution and bill of rights and votes to undermind it is Guilty of Treason and needs to be prosocuted it may be our best shot for the entire free world.

M.D. December 5, 2011 7:52 am (Pacific time)

Leonardo Davinci once said I can turn atriangle into a square if I sat it enough times! My family came to Oregon in 1845 with the meeks party and settled in whats now Keiser. As with many of you I'm deeply concerned about the future and if we don't do something we are heading for a north Korea type existance people who are killed if the say or complain about anything! We all want to know who's behind it and whats thier plan and what to do about it. This link will explain everything it requires firefox or google chrome it was done buy a 1% insider Foster Gamble of Proctor and Gamble, it's best to watch the movie first but it's $5.00 please understand i'm in no way associated with it but you will want to share it as well. It shows how they are taking over and more or less what we are upagainst the TSA is thier imediate weapon, soon they are already directing the attects on us and no one in congress will do anything about it if you nave been to an airport and you go through the X ray machings it's equal to 100 xrays those machings are designed for objects never intended for living things! it doesn't take much searching to find the atrocities the have done to us already theres no one to stop them! Theres no recourse because our rights are already gone it's all aboput intimidation and control sexual assalts are common many catured on cell phones even Texas Gov. officials were groped, no one is safe with out our constitutional and bill of rights. it's designed to protect us from tyanny. The real terrorists are from within, 911 was needed to kill our rights and implement the TSA. Send this to every one you know but be carful anyone can be a terrorist now thanks to our Rebublic conrolled Gov. http://www.thrivemovement.com/the_problem-gda Please let me know if it doesn't work. Thanks for listening. M.D.

Truth December 5, 2011 6:38 am (Pacific time)

@ the 2 comments below me.. it gives you the reasons why this isnt on the news.. and it tells you the name of the bill.. this is all over non blacked out news. so im pretty sure you guys are both just idiots who dont know how to read.. get your facts straight before you try and say that there is no problem

Frank December 5, 2011 3:15 am (Pacific time)

If this were true the author would have provided us with both the bills name and who co sponsored it. Since neither are forthcoming, likely because there was no such bill, count it for what it is ... fear mongering to gullible people.

Editor: We carried this when it was very fresh, the comment section contains a lot of follow-up information, look for live links. Trust me, it is real.

Ashley December 5, 2011 12:45 am (Pacific time)

The only thing I am wondering is...if this is true...why is it just with this newspaper and not all over the news for Americans? I dont know where this news company is getting their information, but they obviously like to cause panic to Americans when there is nothing for us to panic about. Editor get a life and write about something that is actually going on in life!

Kay December 4, 2011 8:56 pm (Pacific time)

We are living in he last days! The worst is yet to come. God. Be with us all.

Petey Loadsafun December 4, 2011 6:29 pm (Pacific time)

Obviously, we are not gettng the whole story from the foreign affairs angle. I was surprised about the action withdraing from the Middle East, and the recent revelation abut banks getting tons ($13B worth) of interest-free money. Maybe it is all going down, and the already-protected are pulling up the drawbridge on the moat...Welcome to the New Feudalism, folks.

zarberg December 4, 2011 5:17 pm (Pacific time)

My humble apologies if it's linked in here, but does anyone know who the 7 dissenting votes were? I know it was "1 independent, 3 dems, 3 repubs" which means Bernie Sanders voted against.

Editor: Two were from Oregon.

Belle December 4, 2011 4:21 pm (Pacific time)

The only man I would think that could help us is Bill Clinton.

Phil December 4, 2011 1:32 pm (Pacific time)

Who wrote this article? I must be living in another America...

Editor: Read the rules 'Phil' better yet just go away, we don't approve rude profane comments like yours.

Vitorino Batalim December 4, 2011 3:22 pm (Pacific time)

That's one of many consequencies of Nazification of America by american Zionist workin, all of them, for Israel. At the end they will destroy the USA and tell everybody itr was Non Zionist's fault.

davesnothere December 4, 2011 2:33 pm (Pacific time)

Ya'll are some paranoid people. No matter WHAT Congress/a President says, writes, passes or whatever, MY rights will never be taken away from me. Period. I can only speak for myself though. It's your choice really, not someone elses. Oh boy...so if the Bill Of rights is ended, that means I don't have the right to bear arms. So, come and try to take my arms away from me and see what happens. I may even use my Freedom of Speech when you do! :)

pinko December 4, 2011 2:20 pm (Pacific time)

TENETS of the Bill of Rights. this ain't no motel.

anon December 4, 2011 1:51 pm (Pacific time)

your breaking my balls obama .-.

Kevin Banks December 4, 2011 1:14 pm (Pacific time)

Gee have they forgotten our history. I mean we did have a bloody American Revolution as a result of being pushed around. Do we need another one so that they finally get it.

gerald December 4, 2011 12:43 pm (Pacific time)

Dont Forget, Vote them ALL out!!!!

in search of accuracy and logic December 4, 2011 12:53 pm (Pacific time)

I would be more convinced of the perils by an article that is free of nonsensical rhetoric and errors that speak to impassioned but not logical writing. A) The intro written by JM had nonsense sentences mixed with fearstirring images. B) Please be concerned about the tenets of the B of R, not the residents (tenants). C) "Even the ACLU." Did you mean "of course the ACLU"? As a concern for loss of civil liberties is in their name, I doubt it is a surprise that they verbalize concern on this issue...

Charles Bryant December 4, 2011 12:47 pm (Pacific time)

With respect to the piece you put out on line about the “end of the Bill of Rights in America” due to the passage of SB 1867(which you did not bother to cite in your article), one should be encouraged to look up and read the Bill for themselves in its entirety. In doing so for myself, I found out that the dispensation of “posse comitatus”, as you duly noted in your editorial on line, is not done away with and the wholesale arrest of citizens at will is not the end result of the Bill either. Rather, if one takes the time and trouble to read the Bill they will find that what it does is formulates those actions that can be taken with respect to those who are identified as being engaged in terrorist activities, (specifically Al Qaida, Taliban, et cetera). What it DOES NOT do is allow for the detention or arrest of those who are lodging peaceful protests or otherwise exercising their rights to free speech and assembly. Before posting diatribes deriding this piece of proposed legislation or that, let us educate ourselves about what we are speaking before airing an opinion over the public media for all to see. Whether or not one is correct in their suppositions is beside the point so long as one is true to their belief, however if one is simply putting forth a postulation for the sake making an argument to no good end then what is the point?

DivineNewsNetwork.com December 4, 2011 12:33 pm (Pacific time)

People we are seeing the beginning of a new roman empire being created to mimic the first beast as the prophecy of the bible stated. Its only a matter of time. Rev. 13:15, "And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast (Rome), that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed." (KJV) Get right with the Lord now so you will not fall into this great lie that is coming... Isaiah 66:4, "I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not." ... 2 Thessalonians 2:11, "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie" (KJV) God Help Us All...

windrunner December 4, 2011 12:04 pm (Pacific time)

Editor,
It seems you are the only one being 'offended' by the comments from the angry posters. We are well beyond the anger stage at this point in time, and passivity will not further any progress in eliminating the evil that has been overtaking the country. Does a 'utility' have to be private for it not to be censored IYO?

Editor: We're not arguing about this, follow the rules and leave your comments.

R Patrick December 4, 2011 12:00 pm (Pacific time)

This royally pisses me off this is no longer the country i grew up in think i might just denounce my citizenship now

Someonewhoreads December 4, 2011 10:48 am (Pacific time)

This is probably the most shoddy news writing I have ever seen. You should be ashamed. You did no research and are sensationalizing your claims to the point of no return. This article is an embarrassment to your organization and you as an editor. How could you publish something that clearly has nothing to do with reality? Have you read the bill and its parts that explicitly state that this has nothing to do with American citizens? Do you know that the military can already detain unlawful combatants such as terrorists indefinitely. This law just makes it legal to do the same if they are captured on U.S. soil.

Editor: Right, meaning it can be used against any type of resistance, the thing Jefferson told us we should do if faced with tyranny, recall that part from your history classes? The government is supposed to fear its citizens, not the other way around. This is fundamental. What they are doing is restructuring the laws so they can use these fascist rules against the Occupy movement. Think about it. And say what you want, Salem-News.com has been here for almost eight years, we are probably the most important news organization on the planet. Live with it, deal with it, but don't get out a brush and try to touch it up, because it is what it is.

Anonymous December 4, 2011 9:33 am (Pacific time)

Here is how it works..Wyden, or whoever, goes to the obama administration, and says:
"Hey, I have been going along pretty well with you guys, but my constituents will not be happy if I vote yes. Is it ok to vote no? The obama administration says: "yeah, you have been a good little follower, and we have plenty of votes...go for it..But you owe us one" THAT my friends, is how the game is played.

Editor: Ouch, how possible that seems....

Anonymous December 4, 2011 9:28 am (Pacific time)

You have to look at a congress persons entire record, not one vote. Its common knowledge that some are allowed to vote against majority to please constituents, as long as it does not change the outcome. not because they are people who care. And... 1. Government proven now to ship guns and drugs in and out of the country. Fast and Furious is only one example. 2. Invasion of the most prosperous country in Africa, killing tens of thousands of civilians, putting al ciada in charge, and now there is massive civil war. The country has been bombed back to third world status. 3. The FDA allows pharma and ag industries get away with murder, while raiding raw milk dairy farmers who have been in business for decades and never had a complaint. 4. The government gave the banks trillions at less than zero interest, then they lent it back to the U.S. at 3%. 5. Nobody is going to jail for the the banking fraud, in fact, those that caused it are now on obama's cabinet. I could do this ALL DAY!....Is this the type of people we want to have in control of this absolute gestapo legislation? 95% of DC needs to be fired...NOW! I dont care what your politics are, but I can tell you one absolute fact...Ron Paul is probably the only honest politician we have. Alan Greyson was pretty cool also, and the dummies of his state did not re-elect him..goes to show the ignorance.

LOL December 4, 2011 9:21 am (Pacific time)

He put quotes around "if we want it to." As if the to say the bill really said those exact words. If you are going to quote something. Quote it right. Do not make up your own words and then put quotes around it.

LOL December 4, 2011 7:07 am (Pacific time)

It states, "the requirement for military detention does not extend to U.S. citizens." Republican goosesteppers, please explain why the "requirement" does not extend.

Mike December 4, 2011 5:22 am (Pacific time)

I'm concerned about the claims in this article, when the vote numbers are way off. 38 (yay) -60 (nay) was the final vote. not 97-3.

Anonymous December 4, 2011 5:10 am (Pacific time)

buy a gun

outsideobserver December 4, 2011 4:34 am (Pacific time)

Welcome to the Union of Soviet National Socialist States of America. Liberty and Justice, for some. The Land of the Free (as long as you do as you are told).

S Longley December 3, 2011 10:01 pm (Pacific time)

Thanks , I saw this via a share on FB will pass it on..I see both Merkley and Wyden voted against this bill-of only 7 who recognized the dangers of this bill...congress must be sucking up the laughing gas while america burns

Editor: Although I don't know them terribly well, I have known both of these men for years and it is a good day to be from Oregon, thanks.

SB 1867 December 3, 2011 8:22 pm (Pacific time)

It's Senate Bill 1867

Englishman December 3, 2011 9:10 pm (Pacific time)

Look, the way I see it, it quite simple, not only does the USA need to look a the collapse financially but with Oil becoming a even more limited resource this world will expand again, this era/time is the best we are gonna get, forget about the great and the good USA being the worlds police force, no meaning that sarcastically, I generally believe in the people of America as great people, however eventually WOMD could be used be against terrorist home nations, all of Americas foreign policy will be dictator-ed by Oil, I just hope we find a greater fuel source before the collapse of freedom, only then will freedom really return for us all, god bless america.

Rob K December 3, 2011 8:51 pm (Pacific time)

Editor,

I've noticed there are a few posts which are a. presumably coming from the same IP and b. stating the exact same thing under different names. It probably has to do with the time it takes to turn around a post from hitting the leave a comment button to actually seeing it posted on the page. You may delete my replicated posts if it will clean up this forum.

I'm glad you responded to my post. If you leave your email address, I'd love to discuss this less publicly. If you're THE Editor for Salem-News, I'll contact you there, instead.

By whose authority are your friends deemed terrorists? Have they been detained by the US Government or Military? I'm doubtful, namely because there are far too many people who "have friends" or "know a guy" and can never provide anything less than vague details surrounding their supporting argument. I believe this apprehension is justified as you have little factual foundation in your earlier posts and rely on speculation (The Defense Bill was in the house long before the Occupy movement started to evolve into what it is today).

As for Mandella, the 1937 League of Nations Convention Definition of Terrorism actually did define his acts as terrorism.

The United States, in their collective wisdom, deemed it necessary to have a more definitive identifier of terrorist acts and that is why we have things like the US Code Title 22.

And, just as a matter of conversational etiquette, starting a rebuttal with "Are you serious?" and in all caps is rude. Yes. I'm serious. That's why I wrote it.

Editor: OK Rob, that was rude I admit, but we are frequently called terrorists here at Salem-News.com because we report truthful accounts from the various resistance movements. At any rate, one person I am close to that Israel deemed a terrorist is Ken O'Keefe, he is a Salem-News.com writer. He was aboard the Mavi Marmara when Israeli attacked he and other unarmed crew leaving nine dead. Another friend, Dave MacMillan, faced the same from his native Australia over a pro-Palestinian song. It goes on, I can tell you about five U.S. motorcycle club members refused entry to Norway a couple of weeks ago, there is a connection to all of this within that also. My name is Tim King and my email is tim@salem-news.com, thanks.

Draenis December 3, 2011 7:31 pm (Pacific time)

Yes people are right that the bill does not pertain to US citizens but... For anyone who claims this doesn't apply to US citizens, you're missing the legal mathematics. If anyone remembers a little law called the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, then go look at section 501. Section 501: Expatriation of Terrorists. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1481, an American can lose his citizenship by voluntarily, and with the intent to relinquish nationality, taking any of a number of actions, including: (1) obtaining Nationality in a foreign state; (2) taking an oath of allegiance to a foreign state; and, most importantly, (3) serving in the armed forces of a foreign state that are engaged in hostilities against the United States. The current expatriation statute does not, however, provide for the relinquishing of citizenship in cases where an American serves in a hostile foreign terrorist organization. It thus fails to take account of the myriad ways in which, in the modern world, war can be waged against the United States. This provision would amend 8 U.S.C. § 1481 to make clear that, just as an American can relinquish his citizenship by serving in a hostile foreign army, so can he relinquish his citizenship by serving in a hostile terrorist organization. Specifically, an American could be expatriated if, with the intent to relinquish nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides material support to, a group that the United States has designated as a "terrorist organization," if that group is engaged in hostilities against the United States. The government can strip your citizenship simply by declaring you're behaving as a terrorist. Are you someone who stands up for your rights and for the Constitution? You might be a terrorist. Are you someone who doesn't feel like answering police questions at a random stop; might be a terrorist. Essentially the term "terrorist" is so widely and poorly defined that anyone who disagrees with whichever Dictator-in-Chief is in office can be declared a possible terrorist.

Anonymous December 3, 2011 7:11 pm (Pacific time)

This article accomplishes nothing but rousing irrational fears with a bunch of contradicting "facts" and conspiracy theories that are certifiably insane with anyone who holds common sense, logic, and the ability to think for one's self. If not though, enjoy the apparent military regime apocalypse that will result from a defense bill that cuts the Pentagon's budget and allows for military detaining of terrorist suspects and does absolutely nothing else. Of course, this is all if it passes the committee, then goes to the House and passes the House, then goes to Obama and isn't vetoed (which it would be), then goes back to Congress and receives a substantial vote to override the veto, then is placed into law, which is highly improbable. Carry on.

Hardwyre is wrong December 3, 2011 6:38 pm (Pacific time)

"Essentially the term 'terrorist' is so widely and poorly defined that anyone who disagrees with whichever Dictator-in-Chief is in office can be declared a possible terrorist." -Hardwyre

No. That's incorrect. In fact, terrorism is so clearly defined, it is impossible to mistake someone simply acting violently (unruly protestor, paranoid conspiracy theorist, or angry housewife) for an actual terrorist.

Editor: ARE YOU SERIOUS? No way, that is the worst thing you could ever say. I have friends designated as terrorists for assisting Palestinians and Tamils seeking equal human rights. Both Reagan and Thatcher called Nelson Mandela a terrorist because he refused to refrain from violence if it was necessary to battle the violent apartheid regime. The U.S. designates people as terrorists because they don't want to use the accurate term which is 'political prisoner'.

U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)

(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents

There is nothing in any of the laws and/or proposed laws on this webpage, including yours, that can even remotely be interpreted as, "the government can strip your citizenship simply by declaring you're behaving as a terrorist."

It's frightening you can twist simple black and white phrases to fit your paranoid fantasies and promote your anti-government agenda.

Editor: The government is frightening, those who advocate for this madness are frightening. Finally, I see that you are posting under different names Bob, that is not acceptable, so decide who you are if you are going to write again, and once I've addressed your points, and I have, you don't need to keep making it repeatedly.

Hardwyre December 3, 2011 4:03 pm (Pacific time)

For anyone who claims this doesn't apply to US citizens, you're missing the legal mathematics. If anyone remembers a little law called the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, then go look at section 501.

Section 501: Expatriation of Terrorists.

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1481, an American can lose his citizenship by voluntarily, and with the intent to relinquish nationality, taking any of a number of actions, including: (1) obtaining Nationality in a foreign state; (2) taking an oath of allegiance to a foreign state; and, most importantly, (3) serving in the armed forces of a foreign state that are engaged in hostilities against the United States. The current expatriation statute does not, however, provide for the relinquishing of citizenship in cases where an American serves in a hostile foreign terrorist organization. It thus fails to take account of the myriad ways in which, in the modern world, war can be waged against the United States.

This provision would amend 8 U.S.C. § 1481 to make clear that, just as an American can relinquish his citizenship by serving in a hostile foreign army, so can he relinquish his citizenship by serving in a hostile terrorist organization. Specifically, an American could be expatriated if, with the intent to relinquish nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides material support to, a group that the United States has designated as a "terrorist organization," if that group is engaged in hostilities against the United States.

The government can strip your citizenship simply by declaring you're behaving as a terrorist. Are you someone who stands up for your rights and for the Constitution? You might be a terrorist. Are you someone who doesn't feel like answering police questions at a random stop; might be a terrorist. Essentially the term "terrorist" is so widely and poorly defined that anyone who disagrees with whichever Dictator-in-Chief is in office can be declared a possible terrorist.

NDAA + DSEA = Bye bye Bill of Rights.

Anonymous December 3, 2011 3:53 pm (Pacific time)

I agree 100000% with McFly, and I have been researching this stuff for over a decade.

Mcfly December 3, 2011 3:44 pm (Pacific time)

What this all is really boiling down to is the military will be spread out throughout the country in anticipation of the riots that will happen once Obama is ready to announce to the country and world that the American dollar has defaulted and is worth the same as monopoly money and our savings and retirement will be seized. This has been on going for a long time. With the U.S simply printing out more money to cover debts it just added to the over all country's debt and lead up to the U.S dollar defaulting. This is a serious matter and all the nay sayer's that want to disagree that this is NOT happening will be completely shocked and won't know what to do when they are broke and will spend what little money they have on food. Get ready to say bye to your fancy iphone and ipods you won't be able to afford to keep them going on anymore. To the people that understand what is going on and what WILL happen you need to invest as much money as possible into buying metals like gold and silver before you have no money at all or the price of gold and silver skyrockets so high that you simply can't afford it. I would do this sooner then later. The U.S. as we once knew it will be completely different and very soon..

Mark December 3, 2011 3:40 pm (Pacific time)

@Yeah... You obviously don't pay attention. We don't have a "Republican controlled Senate". The Senate is controlled by Democrats and has been since 2007.

Zie December 3, 2011 3:05 pm (Pacific time)

Maybe they are speaking of the part that says a waiver can grant the military the right to bypass the requirement for someone to be associated with 9/11 or Al-Quada, but DIRECTLY below that it says that it does not apply to U.S. citizens or legal residents. I do NOT see how this is contradictory in any way unless you would LIKE it to be interpreted as such. The bill also explicitly says it is not meant to expand or limit the power of the president from the current state. You could try reading all of section 1031 and 1032 instead of just part of it, Anon? http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s1867pcs.pdf

Anon December 3, 2011 2:49 pm (Pacific time)

The terrifying part is even if the president veto's it Congress has the power to override presidential veto. I did read the pieces of the proposed bill that says it is not applicable to U.S. citizens but what about the part that was mentioned as contradictory to this statement? No one seems to have posted that part yet.

HELLBENTFURY December 3, 2011 2:48 pm (Pacific time)

Of course one of the sponsors was John McCain he is absolutely insane I remember how his debates went when he was running for pres thats a scary thought if he had become president obama didnt create our problems you can blame BUSH both bush administrations for that!!!

Zie December 3, 2011 2:47 pm (Pacific time)

Also here is the actual text of this bill. You can read sections 1031 and 1032 for yourselves before believing everything you read. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s1867pcs.pdf

Douglas Benson December 3, 2011 2:37 pm (Pacific time)

Jeff Merkley is D OR. {one of my reps]

Zie December 3, 2011 2:31 pm (Pacific time)

How is a bill passing in the Senate the direct result of Obama being in office? I have also read other things about this bill that its language will be changed to ensure that it does not apply to U.S. citizens. Just because something passed in the Senate doesn't make it law. There is a system of checks and balances for a reason... The paranoia and propensity to believe the first bit of information presented that is displayed here is shocking.

Get.the.Facts December 3, 2011 2:23 pm (Pacific time)

For those who have questioned the validity of the article, here are the facts: The bill is S1867. The name is the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. The senate passed the bill late last night. The vote was 93-7. Senators voting against the bill are: Thomas Harken D-IA, Jeff Merkley D-OK, Ron Wyden D-OR, Thomas Coburn R-OR, Mike Lee R-UT and Rand Paul R-KY. The seventh nay voter was not listed. The bill's sponsor is Carl Levin D-MI and supposedly, the bill was crafted by Levin and John McCain R-AZ in secret.

Rob K December 3, 2011 2:16 pm (Pacific time)

The Defense Bill is called S. 1867 Section 1031, page 426, lines 16-24 and page 427, lines 1-14 Details who can be locked up. Section 1032, page 430, lines 8-20 Quoted by "anon" below. Details this does NOT pertain to US CITIZENS.

Fact Checker December 3, 2011 2:08 pm (Pacific time)

The 2012 Defense Bill is S. 1867, Section 1031 introduces the section in question. This is who shall be detained through pursuant military forces: (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. From S. 1867 Section 1032, page 430, lines 8-20 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, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States. Editor, please submit a retraction. Your article is misinformation for those who don't know how to access the bill. I haven't said anything offensive, I've just stated the truth.

Fact Checker December 3, 2011 2:01 pm (Pacific time)

Section 1031 introduces the section in question. This is who shall be detained through pursuant military forces: (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. From S. 1867 Section 1032, page 430, lines 8-20 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, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States. Editor, please submit a retraction. Your article is misinformation for those who don't know how to access the bill. I haven't said anything offensive, I've just stated the truth.

Truth Hurts December 3, 2011 1:56 pm (Pacific time)

Please read Senate Bill 1867 Sec. 1031 and 1032

Vortexx December 3, 2011 1:55 pm (Pacific time)

The only thing I could find was a section expressly prohibiting the use on American Citizens. I don' think the guy who read the article actually read the bill, or maybe he would have added a quote...like this:

"‘National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012’’.

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.
Subsection (b) Covered Persons
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurredon 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.

(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."

Editor: It has already happened, it isn't true that this does not apply to U.S. citizens by every account.

Truth Hurts December 3, 2011 1:54 pm (Pacific time)

Please read Senate Bill 1867 Sec. 1031 and 1032 Available here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf ‘‘National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012’’.

Editor: Thank you

Prove it December 3, 2011 1:32 pm (Pacific time)

dont we still have rights til Obama pass's it...

Proveit December 3, 2011 1:31 pm (Pacific time)

we still have rights until obama signs it.

andrew December 3, 2011 1:23 pm (Pacific time)

Who what should we name our country now? whatever it is i am not going down like this i am taking my passport and leaving. "A Country without law and Choices is not a country at all" goodbye freedom Hello Hell >(

Jolly Roger December 3, 2011 1:23 pm (Pacific time)

does anyone heard of john titor or person that came from the future and warning people about a world war or civil war that is under rule in usa? this bill here, seem quite similar. that this bill will void the bill of rights and force usa under military rule. just think about it. what if this bill has pass. any rights will be no good and people will fight for the bill of rights. i for once will vote no on this bill. i hate to see usa without the bill of rights and see a civil war. note- if anyone watch japanese animation. look up, Steins Gate. you will see how usa end up and someone tries to prevent it. enjoy.

SHEEP December 3, 2011 1:15 pm (Pacific time)

READ THE BILL FOR YOURSELF BEFORE YOU REPOST IT IS NOT WHAT THIS ARTICLE IS REPRESENTING IT TO BE, IF YOU TAKE THE TIME TO READ WHAT SOMEONE ELSE TELLS YOU IT MEANS, RESEARCH IT FOR YOURSELF, IT'S JUST ANOTHER SLANDER

Editor: Again, it would be great if only you were not wrong. People can are are researching it, myself included. I'd say it is mostly a reaction to the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Anonymous December 3, 2011 1:09 pm (Pacific time)

i fear for every citizen in our country if it passes into law it will make Libya and Egypt look like a day in the park

Seriously? December 3, 2011 12:46 pm (Pacific time)

I question the legitimacy of this article. You would think that the name of the bill would be mentioned. It's not. Everyone is just freaking out way to much to realize that. You would also think a bill of this magnitude would make nation headlines. If anyone can find legitimate link to this proposed bill (i.e. a .gov address) post it below.
Is America's population really this stupid and gullible today? If so I fear for our countries future.

Editor: Wish you were right, sadly it is real and while I am looking and not seeing a number associated with it, I do see it being referred to as the Defense Bill. It is a $662 billion dollar matter. This country is done, there will be little time left to see life carried out in a way we are accustomed to. The war in Afghanistan is failing, Iraq was pure failure from start to now, and blind support of Israel and other violent regimes will spell the end. Calls for violence in Iran, it is so bad.... I suppose we will all end up with what we deserve. Put on your seat belts kids....

webfoot December 3, 2011 11:19 am (Pacific time)

I think AnotherAnonymous or Anonymous, whoever he is, needs some serious mental health help. SERIOUSLY!! :(

Anonymous December 3, 2011 12:24 pm (Pacific time)

1. Anyone debating this in regards to a left/right issue is not just naive, but,in my opinion, completely insane. Both parties are owned, we have a one party dictatorship..Wake the heck up! 2. In regards to a comment about this not affecting the average American? You are also insane IMO. What happens, when I say 911 was an inside job? Just those words alone can make the government feel threatened.. Getting my drift here? How about "vaccines are dangerous"? Will I get arrested? For those that do not read history, this is a tactic used by the rothchild cartel using zionists and hitler to control Europe and set up an israei zionist state to take over the middle east. We are seeing a carbon copy of the rise of the hitler regime... Douglas: thanks for bringing up infowars..May I suggest researching Alan Watt..He brings a very interesting take to all of this. He has been my favorite lately. David Icke is not bad either. You can find them on youtube.

Crystal December 3, 2011 12:20 pm (Pacific time)

Does anybody noq the name of the actual bill??

Anonymous December 3, 2011 12:06 pm (Pacific time)

Obama needs to veto it. Its not his fault we need to have faith he's not stupid enough to sign this load of nonsense.

angry citizen December 3, 2011 11:33 am (Pacific time)

We have the type of government that the people can take over at will. Why is everybody too scared to do so? Rally all peoples against this together with pitch forks and stocks with fire and March to the white house and push away all government officals who get in our way. This is gonna be the new New World Order or even a new civil war. And we don't like in a free country, we have NO freedoms. This country will be fill of anarchism if they do pass this. When Bush was still head honcho he wanted to change to a dictatorship. Y'all might want to start memorizing the Canadian national anthem.

Yeah December 3, 2011 11:27 am (Pacific time)

So, let me get this straight - Obama is to blame for a Republican controlled senate's decision? And no, Obama can't kill the bill because a 93-7 vote tells me that they'd definitely override his veto..

Angry Bastard December 3, 2011 11:25 am (Pacific time)

This just goes to show that anyone can be bought....with a vote of 97-3, you know someone was greasing alot of palms.....wtf

Chase December 3, 2011 11:24 am (Pacific time)

You Americans brought this on yourselves. Your insistence on going along with a 2 party system has resulted in 2 parties that have the same objective - to put you under their thumb. Congratulations, you're getting everything you deserve because you voted for it. You were so busy letting politicians froth you at the mouth about liberals vs. Conservatives that you didn't even notice they were the same entity, and the collective money you gave Manchuran Candidates to publicize themselves has wrought your destruction.

Bob December 3, 2011 11:20 am (Pacific time)

If you nullify the bill of rights, we the people are gunna be in a world of shit. Doesnt matter whos to blame, or what its called. Thats our backbone. U wont even have the right to complain about this. U will have no free speach. Its the only thing that keeps us free. Imprisonment for nothing... This happened b4 2, the french revolution, by storming the bastille. Let it repeat itself. Just sooner than later...

webfoot December 3, 2011 11:19 am (Pacific time)

I think AnotherAnonymous or Anonymous, or whatever he calls himself, needs some mental health help. SERIOUSLY! :(

Anonymous December 3, 2011 11:15 am (Pacific time)

I have been seeing this reported on several internet sites yet nothing on the national news (TV or otherwise)...I am getting nervous that the global economic collapse IS eminent and that our government is realizing this and are trying to prepare for the worst and stripping our bill of rights freedoms without us knowing...what can we do? I am certain that this bill won't apply to our congressman just like social security and Medicare. Take heed America "something stinks in the state of Denmark".

realitybomb December 3, 2011 9:39 am (Pacific time)

This is what happens when you have a weak president that the Senate doesn't respect. They think they can get away with anything. It's the president's responsibility to prevent the Senate from thinking he is a complete wuss. Instead he has opened the doorway for Hillary to do whatever she wants to with the Senate. Democrats are supposed to prevent this sort of thing yet somehow they never do. Good job.

Nate S. December 3, 2011 9:20 am (Pacific time)

I agree with Colli. It would help to have more information about which senators to contact.

John December 3, 2011 9:13 am (Pacific time)

@Anonymous - Way to blame Obama for a bill passed by a 97-3 vote in the Senate. Excellent logic.

kh December 3, 2011 8:59 am (Pacific time)

@Anonymous: That is the most ignorant thing I've read today. Does the President of the US vote during senate sessions in your little world? The White House is the only thing standing in the way of this bill; they threatened a veto last week if it went through, and now it did. May you should look at your portion of those 97 senators you voted into office who passed the bill, NOT THE PRESIDENT.

Heather December 3, 2011 8:58 am (Pacific time)

Dear Anon, The Senate is not appointed by the President. The entire Congress is VOTED IN by the people of America. Watch what you're saying before you jump down someone's throat.

JAS December 3, 2011 8:37 am (Pacific time)

Good point, COLLI. I'd also be interested in seeing a link to the bill itself or at least the bill number so we can look it up at senate.gov.

Jesus December 3, 2011 8:34 am (Pacific time)

You didn't mention who sponsored the Bill or it's name. I question the legitimacy of this article.

anon December 3, 2011 8:14 am (Pacific time)

(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, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States." And I'm afraid the Constitution says quite clearly at Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Wow, really? December 3, 2011 7:59 am (Pacific time)

How does a bill passed by senate make Obama to blame? I'm just trying to figure that out. He can veto the bill to stop it from becoming law. If Bush was president still, I have a feeling it would have already been signed. Just my opinion.

Jake S December 3, 2011 7:51 am (Pacific time)

The only Americans that this applies to, is if you are an American and a member of al-Qaida or connected to them. The majority of non-terrorist Americans have nothing to fear from this bill.

Slow_Ride December 3, 2011 7:46 am (Pacific time)

Anonymous, perhaps you need to refresh you knowledge of recent American history. Your beloved George "W" was president and "decider" on the Patriot Act. That law was without a doubt set precedent in all cases of "terrorism law". Perhaps it's now ALL of our problem to solve, pointing blame solves nothing.

Matt December 3, 2011 7:42 am (Pacific time)

There is nothing Liberal about a military state, sunshine. But good to see your hate is well directed.

Dear Anonymous #1: December 3, 2011 7:41 am (Pacific time)

A) Obama didn't propose this bill, and it passed 97-3. ALSO, if anyone bothered to READ anything about the bill, you'd see it's absolutely nothing like what the ridiculous headline suggests.

Susan December 3, 2011 7:35 am (Pacific time)

OK, what can we do as the people now to stop this?

Anonymous December 3, 2011 7:27 am (Pacific time)

American politicians (voted in by id10tic US voters) are all feminized men and women that want to "protect" us. As such, freedom is history.

Salazar December 3, 2011 7:24 am (Pacific time)

We need to vote Ron Paul into office.

Ralph E. Stone December 3, 2011 7:14 am (Pacific time)

The National Defense Authorization bill now on the Senate floor includes troubling provisions that would give the President - and all future presidents - the authority to indefinitely imprison people, without charge or trial, both abroad and inside the United States and would mandate military detention of some civilians who would otherwise be outside of military control. The indefinite detention without charge or trial provisions are so harmful that the Obama White House has threatened to veto the bill if they are not removed from it. Hopefully, Obama will exercise his veto power. But would the Senate and the House have the votes to override the veto? Also, how would the courts deal with this bill? Thus, castigating Obama for this outrageous attack on the Bill of Rights is a little premature.

Douglas Benson December 3, 2011 7:13 am (Pacific time)

The list of traitors can be found at info wars.

YouAreBlind December 3, 2011 7:09 am (Pacific time)

"This is my thanks to all your liberal scumbags who voted Obama in to the office." really ? it passed 97-3 which means it had support from both sides. you are as blind and ignorant as they come.

AnotherAnonymous December 3, 2011 7:06 am (Pacific time)

Hey Editor, stop the insults? WTF! Why allow comments at all then? Will you allow this post or censor me too? What the Socialist regime with Obama at the helm is KILL THE COUNTRY. He MUST be VOTED OUT!

Editor: This is not a public utility, you don't have 'rights' here, follow?

Anonymous December 3, 2011 6:23 am (Pacific time)

scumbag anon complains about Obama despite the White House's stance that they would likely veto this bill if it passed through Senate. At least understand and keep abreast of government if you want to criticize it.

AshleyRose December 3, 2011 5:57 am (Pacific time)

Everyone who reads this article needs to share it with all family and all friends its important! Facebook Twitter Blogs everything anywhere and everywhere!

Margaret December 3, 2011 5:45 am (Pacific time)

Hey COLLI, Sen. John McCain (R) and Sen. Carl Levin (D – MI) were the sponsors. Its imbedded in theNational Defense Authorization Act bill.

Anonymous December 3, 2011 12:47 am (Pacific time)

This is my thanks to all your liberal scumbags who voted Obama in to the office. You all can kiss this great Country good by. You don't even know what you did to this Country. God help us.

Editor: Stop your insults from this point forward, make your point in a better way, or I will not approve your comments.

Rob G. December 3, 2011 12:35 am (Pacific time)

End the military and corporate rule asap. Restore the Bill of Rights. Let protesters out of jail. Take everyone who twarts the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence and put them on trial, only.

COLLI December 2, 2011 11:37 pm (Pacific time)

Interesting approack but how about some key information like who sponsored this bill and who co-sponsored it. Who voted in favor and who opposed. This information I ask for would seriously help anyone wanting to contact their senators, write articles for local papers, make telephone calls, etc. Just not even close enough to enough facts here. If you are going to shout fire it helps to point the way to the fire exit!

[Return to Top]