Michigan government relevant topic regarding NDAA

oakland county passed a resolution to oppose the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA:

http://peopleagainstndaa.com/oakland-county-michigan-defends-u-s-constitution-against-ndaa/

way to go oakland!

ETA: just so we're clear, i posted the thread marked as OT (off topic) and the title was edited to remove that. so if you are here thinking that this thread is about open carry, i apologize. it was my intention for you to know it was not.

This was a C4L (Campaign for Liberty -- organization founded by Ron Paul after 2008 campaign) effort and a decent "win", even if of no value than a political gesture.

i'm a member of C4L

smellslikemichigan said:

i'm a member of C4L

Click to expand...

I'm the Ingham Co coordinator

smellslikemichigan said:

oakland county passed a resolution to oppose the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA:

http://peopleagainstndaa.com/oakland-county-michigan-defends-u-s-constitution-against-ndaa/

way to go oakland!

ETA: just so we're clear, i posted the thread marked as OT (off topic) and the title was edited to remove that. so if you are here thinking that this thread is about open carry, i apologize. it was my intention for you to know it was not.

Click to expand...

I have no issue whatsoever indefinitely detaining FOREIGN TERRORISTS, captured on FOREIGN soil who were actively trying to kill AMERICANS. The US constitution does not apply to foreign nationals on foreign soil. Therefore foreign terrorists captured overseas have NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, they don't even have rights under Geneva (They would fall under the definition of spies, and saboteurs.), and as far as i am concerned those animals have no human rights either.

In my opinion after we have extracted all information possible (Yes I would allow torture, and i mean REAL torture, and would even encourage it.), they should be summarily executed preferably by a slow, and painful method (They want to kill anyone who doesn't want to live in the 9th century so it's only fitting we give them 9th century interrogations followed by 9th century executions), I'm partial to hanging drawing, and quartering, breaking on the wheel, the razor, the Judas Chair, the Iron Maiden, Impalement, burning at the stake, pressing on the stone, the brazen bull, the Pear of Anguish, and even the simple le oublier under the right circumstances.

Remember what they would do to you, and your family if given the chance, and tell me how they deserve rights.

Right now bin laden is in hell having a pineapple stuffed places where it was never meant to go-sideways, I see no reason why they should not get the same treatment on Earth.

Terrorists are not human, and even rank below animals in my opinion, they are less than nothing.

At a minimum we should follow Blackjack Pershing's example, that bought us peace from these savages for 100 years.

Small_Arms_Collector said:

I have no issue whatsoever indefinitely detaining FOREIGN TERRORISTS, captured on FOREIGN soil who were actively trying to kill AMERICANS. The US constitution does not apply to foreign nationals on foreign soil. Therefore foreign terrorists captured overseas have NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, they don't even have rights under Geneva (They would fall under the definition of spies, and saboteurs.), and as far as i am concerned those animals have no human rights either.

In my opinion after we have extracted all information possible (Yes I would allow torture, and i mean REAL torture, and would even encourage it.), they should be summarily executed preferably by a slow, and painful method (They want to kill anyone who doesn't want to live in the 9th century so it's only fitting we give them 9th century interrogations followed by 9th century executions), I'm partial to hanging drawing, and quartering, breaking on the wheel, the razor, the Judas Chair, the Iron Maiden, Impalement, burning at the stake, pressing on the stone, the brazen bull, the Pear of Anguish, and even the simple le oublier under the right circumstances.

Remember what they would do to you, and your family if given the chance, and tell me how they deserve rights.

Right now bin laden is in hell having a pineapple stuffed places where it was never meant to go-sideways, I see no reason why they should not get the same treatment on Earth.

Terrorists are not human, and even rank below animals in my opinion, they are less than nothing.

At a minimum we should follow Blackjack Pershing's example, that bought us peace from these savages for 100 years.

Click to expand...

get back to me when you've read sections 1021 and 1022
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsNEOXQ4RZw

Small_Arms_Collector said:

I have no issue whatsoever indefinitely detaining FOREIGN TERRORISTS, captured on FOREIGN soil who were actively trying to kill AMERICANS. The US constitution does not apply to foreign nationals on foreign soil. Therefore foreign terrorists captured overseas have NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, they don't even have rights under Geneva (They would fall under the definition of spies, and saboteurs.), and as far as i am concerned those animals have no human rights either.

Click to expand...

If rights were granted by the government, specifically to citizens, I might agree.
I have rights by virtue of the fact that I'm a man. That my government recognizes this, at least in theory, is a bonus. (Hint: Check the constitution for "Subjects are hereby granted the right..." or similar)

Small_Arms_Collector said:

In my opinion after we have extracted all information possible (Yes I would allow torture, and i mean REAL torture, and would even encourage it.), they should be summarily executed preferably by a slow, and painful method (They want to kill anyone who doesn't want to live in the 9th century so it's only fitting we give them 9th century interrogations followed by 9th century executions), I'm partial to hanging drawing, and quartering, breaking on the wheel, the razor, the Judas Chair, the Iron Maiden, Impalement, burning at the stake, pressing on the stone, the brazen bull, the Pear of Anguish, and even the simple le oublier under the right circumstances.

Click to expand...

I've long held that such "punishment" is done more for the gratification of the tormentor than to actually address a problem.

What is torture, but very personal miniaturized instance of the tyranny so many of us claim to oppose?
And what is a painful death, but torture without the dubious benefit of "extracting information"?

Small_Arms_Collector said:

Remember what they would do to you, and your family if given the chance, and tell me how they deserve rights.

Click to expand...

Thankfully, that you think they don't "deserve" rights has no effect on whether they have the same.

Small_Arms_Collector said:

Terrorists are not human, and even rank below animals in my opinion, they are less than nothing.

Click to expand...

Hath not a [foreign terrorist] eyes? Hath not a [foreign terrorist] hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as [a non-terrorist American] is? If you ***** [them], do [they] not bleed? if you tickle [them], do [they] not laugh? if you poison [them], do [they] not die?

You say they are not men, yet you would judge them by rule of men.

Xanaseyr said:

If rights were granted by the government, specifically to citizens, I might agree.
I have rights by virtue of the fact that I'm a man. That my government recognizes this, at least in theory, is a bonus. (Hint: Check the constitution for "Subjects are hereby granted the right..." or similar)

Yes, but they are not US Citizens, nor are they on US Soil, hence the constitution has no effect on them, it would be like passing a law that says Cubans in Cuba can not wear red on Sunday, it does not apply to them.

I've long held that such "punishment" is done more for the gratification of the tormentor than to actually address a problem.

Punishment like that is both a punishment, and a deterrent, "do this, and you will be disemboweled like this guy" is far more effective than "do this, and we will put you in a nice secure climate controlled prison, give you 3 hot meals everyday, give you a koran, basic amenities, and treat you well until we eventually release you". It's the same reason that states who allow carry have lower crime rates than those who do not, it's not that all the criminals are getting killed, and that we are piling there bodies in the street like cord wood, it's that they are deterred by the fact that their intended victim might shoot them in the face.

What is torture, but very personal miniaturized instance of the tyranny so many of us claim to oppose?
And what is a painful death, but torture without the dubious benefit of "extracting information"?

Do they show us the same thought?, do they recognize our rights?, or if given the chance would they not saw off your child's head while you watch just because you do not believe as they do?

Thankfully, that you think they don't "deserve" rights has no effect on whether they have the same.

Whether you think that they do has no effect on the fact that they don't.

Hath not a [foreign terrorist] eyes? Hath not a [foreign terrorist] hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as [a non-terrorist American] is? If you ***** [them], do [they] not bleed? if you tickle [them], do [they] not laugh? if you poison [them], do [they] not die?

Hath not a rabid dog?

You say they are not men, yet you would judge them by rule of men.

Click to expand...

Why not? Shall we give them a pass instead?

Small_Arms_Collector said:

Why not? Shall we give them a pass instead?

Click to expand...

*crickets*

Everyone, whether a "citizen" of the US or not, has rights. Those of us that live in a free society understand that our rights don't come from government.

What do we do with terrorists? Same thing we do with other violent criminals. We stop them if they are an imminent threat, or we capture them and give them a trial. Indefinite detention (whether of a domestic terrorist, a foreign terrorist, or some guy arrested for open carrying) is wrong.

And let me add that I think this would be a lot less of a problem if we didn't have such a flawed foreign policy. Terrorists don't hate us because we are free or because we are prosperous. They hate us because of decades of the US propping up puppet dictators, occupying their land with our troops, bombings, etc... 9/11 was blowback for all this (I know, that's not a very popular or politically correct thing to say, but it's reality).

And now we are using the scare tactics of terrorism to convince the people of the US to support the NDAA, which gives the government broad discretionary power to arrest and indefinitely detain even US citizens that are even remotely associated with terrorist groups, and when such an 'association' or 'group' is not even defined!

The NDAA needs to go, now.

well said, kubel

Small_Arms_Collector said:

I have no issue whatsoever indefinitely detaining FOREIGN TERRORISTS, captured on FOREIGN soil who were actively trying to kill AMERICANS. The US constitution does not apply to foreign nationals on foreign soil. Therefore foreign terrorists captured overseas have NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, they don't even have rights under Geneva (They would fall under the definition of spies, and saboteurs.), and as far as i am concerned those animals have no human rights either.

In my opinion after we have extracted all information possible (Yes I would allow torture, and i mean REAL torture, and would even encourage it.), they should be summarily executed preferably by a slow, and painful method (They want to kill anyone who doesn't want to live in the 9th century so it's only fitting we give them 9th century interrogations followed by 9th century executions), I'm partial to hanging drawing, and quartering, breaking on the wheel, the razor, the Judas Chair, the Iron Maiden, Impalement, burning at the stake, pressing on the stone, the brazen bull, the Pear of Anguish, and even the simple le oublier under the right circumstances.

Remember what they would do to you, and your family if given the chance, and tell me how they deserve rights.

Right now bin laden is in hell having a pineapple stuffed places where it was never meant to go-sideways, I see no reason why they should not get the same treatment on Earth.

Terrorists are not human, and even rank below animals in my opinion, they are less than nothing.

At a minimum we should follow Blackjack Pershing's example, that bought us peace from these savages for 100 years.

Click to expand...

I love it when people argue how we should torture terrorists, problem is, they then become the terrorists themselves.

I think we should use the NDAA to disappear you.

ETA: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=torture+fails+to+extract+information Torture is ineffective for information gathering anyway.

sharkey said:

I love it when people argue how we should torture terrorists, problem is, they then become the terrorists themselves.

Wrong. How many people have we murdered because they didn't believe what we do?, how many planes have we flown in to buildings?

I think we should use the NDAA to disappear you.

ETA: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=torture+fails+to+extract+information Torture is ineffective for information gathering anyway.

Wrong. Torture is infective to elicit confessions, it is very effective to get information.

Click to expand...

.

kubel said:

Everyone, whether a "citizen" of the US or not, has rights. Those of us that live in a free society understand that our rights don't come from government.

What do we do with terrorists? Same thing we do with other violent criminals. We stop them if they are an imminent threat, or we capture them and give them a trial. Indefinite detention (whether of a domestic terrorist, a foreign terrorist, or some guy arrested for open carrying) is wrong.

So we should act like police, and try to arrest them, read them meranda rights, drag them through civilian courts, put them in prison where they can radicalize the other prisoners, then release them so they can try to kill us again?

And let me add that I think this would be a lot less of a problem if we didn't have such a flawed foreign policy. Terrorists don't hate us because we are free or because we are prosperous. They hate us because of decades of the US propping up puppet dictators, occupying their land with our troops, bombings, etc... 9/11 was blowback for all this (I know, that's not a very popular or politically correct thing to say, but it's reality).

You really buy the lies don't you? They try to kill us because we don't believe the same as them, that's it. What country were we "occupying" on September 11, 2001?

And now we are using the scare tactics of terrorism to convince the people of the US to support the NDAA, which gives the government broad discretionary power to arrest and indefinitely detain even US citizens that are even remotely associated with terrorist groups, and when such an 'association' or 'group' is not even defined!

Provide a cite.

The NDAA needs to go, now.

Click to expand...

.

Small_Arms_Collector said:

.

Click to expand...

geez. you really don't understand the effect that our country has occupation or not. the real question is where did we have bases? what foreign dictators were we propping up? what countries were we giving or not giving foreign aid?

The sad part about this resolution is it was non-binding and of no force on local police and sheriff. It's mostly just "feel good". It'd have the same effect in law if Michigan Open Carry's BoD did it.

yep. you're right. it will be up to the citizens to stand up against it. i asked the sheriff about the resolution and if he planned on defending the citizens of oakland county against the NDAA on his FB page. he ignored me (not that i was surprised). he was too busy posting fake hurricane pictures.

So we should act like police, and try to arrest them, read them meranda rights, drag them through civilian courts, put them in prison where they can radicalize the other prisoners, then release them so they can try to kill us again?

Click to expand...

Being the policeman of the world is what got us into this mess. I think the whole problem can be solved with a correction to our foreign policy. That means stop occupying foreign countries, stop nation building, stop meddling in the affairs of other countries, etc... But if you have to detain a terrorist (which is what this is all about), that detainment should be done while respecting their rights. So yes, that means Miranda, courts, and prison or execution if due process was followed. Though I'm not in favor of government executions. I would much rather they be killed as an imminent threat.

You really buy the lies don't you? They try to kill us because we don't believe the same as them, that's it. What country were we "occupying" on September 11, 2001?

Click to expand...

Saudi Arabia for one. Prince Sultan Air Base was closed following 9/11 because it was a huge recruiting device for Al Qaeda. 15 of the 19 hijackers who carried out the attacks were from Saudi Arabia. If you aren't aware of the relationship that the US has with the The House of Saud, you should dig a little deeper. We prop up the Saudi dictatorship in exchange for a supply of oil.

Paul Wolfowitz: "There are a lot of things that are different now, and one that has gone by almost unnoticed–but it’s huge–is that by complete mutual agreement between the U.S. and the Saudi government we can now remove almost all of our forces from Saudi Arabia. Their presence there over the last 12 years has been a source of enormous difficulty for a friendly government. It’s been a huge recruiting device for al Qaeda. In fact if you look at bin Laden, one of his principle (sic) grievances was the presence of so-called crusader forces on the holy land, Mecca and Medina. I think just lifting that burden from the Saudis is itself going to open the door to other positive things."

National Security Council, 1954, said "The Near East is of great strategic, political, and economic importance," as it "contains the greatest petroleum resources in the world" as well as "essential locations for strategic military bases in any world conflict." Absolutely, the US has been and is occupying the Arabian Peninsula- and it won't end any time soon- there's still oil left.

Our foreign policy makes our own enemies, unfortunately. I'll also point you to Michael Scheuer, former CIA head of Bin Laden unit in the 90's:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udz5_FdoFGU

And you say I'm the one buying the lies? I fear you are drinking the neo-con Kool-Aid if you say 9/11 wasn't blowback. 9/11 was obvious blowback. Read the 9/11 Commission Report findings.

Provide a cite.

Click to expand...

The precise undefined terms were "substantially supported," "directly supported" and "associated forces."
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, Section 1021 and 1022.
https://www.stopndaa.org/aboutndaa/

Per Wikipedia's article on NDAA: "The detention provisions of the Act have received critical attention by, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, and some media sources which are concerned about the scope of the President's authority, including contentions that those whom they claim may be held indefinitely could include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, including arrests by members of the Armed Forces."

NDAA is bad news for liberty.

kubel said:

We prop up the Saudi dictatorship in exchange for a supply of oil.

Click to expand...

No we don't. Saudi oil is sold on the world market. In fact, we only buy about 12% of our crude and 10% of our total petroleum from Saudi Arabia, and "we" doesn't mean the federal government, it means American and other companies that supply the USA.

But wait, the United States EXPORTS oil, too! How can this be?

That's because oil is a commodity, and when you take transportation and other costs into account, sometimes it's cheaper to get a commodity from outside the country than to transport inside the country, but we can transport outside to other countries (for example, to the Pacific Rim), or maybe we can get more money exporting it to some countries than it costs us to purchase it elsewhere. Or maybe our production exceeds our delivery methods, so we export it. Again, logistics. So we're exporting crude at the same time we're buying it.

Three weeks ago Shell oil applied to the US Commerce Department for another permit to export US crude to Canada.

You think the US government is in these countries controlling them for their oil? No. Do you know why many US (and some other) countries are in Saudi Arabia? Because England was there first and basically taking it for free. US and other companies came in and offered the Saudis a better (more fair) deal. (This was early in the oil industry).

You think we're stealing it or pressuring the Saudis to sell it to us? Heck no! They want to sell it to get money.

The House of Saud wants us there militarily and wants oil money from everyone everywhere to keep their population at bay. Once the old dudes start dying off (already happening) things could start to change, particularly if they get more radicalized by Wahhabism. But they'll sell to Europe or wherever they can to get money!

Please don't cite the ACLU as a valid source of Freedom Fighters, that is like calling the Cub Scouts Elite Military Units. They support what ever freedoms pay them the most.