The NDAA vague enough for indefinite Citizen Rights violation?

You dont get a trial, much less a lawyer.:banghead:

jeremy05 said:

I have just briefly looked at this, but SO FAR looks ok to me. Criminals and Terrorists have way to many rights and ways to slip though our legal system. This looks like a ATTEMPT to close some gaps.

Ill be looking into it more.

Click to expand...

Huh!?!

The whole point of a trial is to figure out whether the accused really is a criminal. To figure out whether the person making the accusation is correct, in error, politically motivated, jumping the gun, biased, looking to enhance his own career, etc., etc., etc.

Basically, you've fallen for the trap laid by non-thinkers. They assume that just because someone is accused, then he really is a criminal or terrorist.

Take a look at the cases of Richard Jewel and Dr. Steven Hatfill.

Jewel was trying to help solve the case, in fact he was the person who first reported the bomb. The FBI was so intent on catching somebody, anybody for the Atlanta Olympics bombing, they set him up to give some video-taped advice. They wanted to twist the video into evidence to be used to prosecute Jewel. Jewel smelled a rat at the last moment and decline to make the video. The memo's from FBI headquarters to the Atlanta field office are in the public hands now I believe.

Dr. Hatfill was suspected of the anthrax attacks in 2001. The FBI destroyed his career and reputation. Eventually he received a settlement from them.

We already have some evidence that Afghan warlords were kidnapping young men and turning them over to the US as "terrorists" to collect rewards--some of those people in Guantanamo may not be terrorists at all.

These are not even the tip of the ice-berg. History is littered--littered!--with examples of prosecutions arising from every motive except putting away a bad guy.

"Ways to slip through our legal system" are actually your due process rights. "Ways to slip through our legal system" is just a variant of "he got off on a technicality", or "a bleeding heart judge let him off on a technicality". What!?! Wrong target! The judge is supposed to let off the accused if there is technically a violation of their rights! The correct target is the police and prosecutors who couldn't bring a case properly, or violated the accused's rights. Many of those little "technicalities" are designed to protect the 4th and 5th Amendment, and to guarantee fairness during the trial process. The rules of the trial process are better known as your due process rights--part of the 5th Amendment. If an accussed gets off on a technicality, it is because the cops or prosecutor effed up; the judge was doing his job.

It has long been a maxim of freedom in this country that some criminals getting away with it are the price we pay for rights; rights protect us from criminals in government, a much more dangerous brand of criminal. Government is not expected to get every crook. Government is expected to only get those it can while playing by the Bill of Rights.

Citizen said:

These are not even the tip of the ice-berg. History is littered--littered!--with examples of prosecutions arising from every motive except putting away a bad guy.

Click to expand...

I agree. Wen Ho Lee is another. He is the Los Alamos scientist who was falsely accused of espionage. The FBI ruined him. He spent a year shackled and chained in prison before they let him go. The government tried to convict him even when they knew he was innocent.

Glock9mmOldStyle said:

Yeah,

Now the issue will be how to get this illegal "law" tossed along with all the dim-witted so called servants of the people who voted it in. My God, don't these forking ice-holes ever look at the Constitution? Hell I'd be happy if any of them could remember the bill of rights! I guess as long as the elites are protected to hell with the peasants?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyieZRmjWQQ&feature=related

Click to expand...

My congress critter (John Conyers) was probably there when the bill of rights was signed.

Truthfully the problem isn't the people who were elected, it is the people that elected them. In my area (read full of dumbocrats) they reelect people like Conyers who have been in office for over half a century and have a family full of criminals. People just do not "get it".

Look at the group of people on the MI gun forums, many are doing cartwheels because if it gets signed into law we will have lost guns rights with SB 760-762 and these are the exact same people that vote for the knuckle heads that pass laws like this one.

Tucker6900 said:

+1000

From a law enforcement point of view, this is a good thing. Having the ability to arrest anyone for suspected terrorism would be great.....for law enforcement.

However, the mere protest against big government could land you in a federal prison...indefinitely....if a military judge deems that to be an act of terrorism.

The entire bill is a joke. For your next assignment, look up beastiality and the NDAA. There is a portion of this bill that repeals a previous law prohibiting sodomy and beastiality among military personnel. Kind of makes you wonder.......

Click to expand...

They have to do that. They have now made it OK for homo's to be in the military so if they don't make these acts OK many more idiots will cry about them not being able to ..... well you get the idea.

Super Trucker said:

they reelect people like Conyers who have been in office for over half a century and have a family full of criminals.

Click to expand...

I know. :banghead:

Citizen said:

Huh!?!

The whole point of a trial is to figure out whether the accused really is a criminal. To figure out whether the person making the accusation is correct, in error, politically motivated, jumping the gun, biased, looking to enhance his own career, etc., etc., etc.

Basically, you've fallen for the trap laid by non-thinkers. They assume that just because someone is accused, then he really is a criminal or terrorist.


"Ways to slip through our legal system" are actually your due process rights. "Ways to slip through our legal system" is just a variant of "he got off on a technicality", or "a bleeding heart judge let him off on a technicality". What!?! Wrong target! The judge is supposed to let off the accused if there is technically a violation of their rights! The correct target is the police and prosecutors who couldn't bring a case properly, or violated the accused's rights. Many of those little "technicalities" are designed to protect the 4th and 5th Amendment, and to guarantee fairness during the trial process. The rules of the trial process are better known as your due process rights--part of the 5th Amendment. If an accussed gets off on a technicality, it is because the cops or prosecutor effed up; the judge was doing his job.

It has long been a maxim of freedom in this country that some criminals getting away with it are the price we pay for rights; rights protect us from criminals in government, a much more dangerous brand of criminal. Government is not expected to get every crook. Government is expected to only get those it can while playing by the Bill of Rights.

Click to expand...

The more I read about this the more I don't like it.

By Technicality's I mean more of non rights violated criminals getting through the system. Believe me LOTS of criminals go free on just policy violations. At first glance this law seems to help with those cases.

jeremy05 said:

The more I read about this the more I don't like it.

By Technicality's I mean more of non rights violated criminals getting through the system. Believe me LOTS of criminals go free on just policy violations. At first glance this law seems to help with those cases.

Click to expand...

Oh, I see.

Can you give me a couple examples or elaborate a little further?

Tucker6900 said:

+1000

From a law enforcement point of view, this is a good thing. Having the ability to arrest anyone for suspected terrorism would be great.....for law enforcement.

However, the mere protest against big government could land you in a federal prison...indefinitely....if a military judge deems that to be an act of terrorism.

The entire bill is a joke. For your next assignment, look up beastiality and the NDAA. There is a portion of this bill that repeals a previous law prohibiting sodomy and beastiality among military personnel. Kind of makes you wonder.......

Click to expand...

Also if you've ever been arrested without any legal grounds,no RAS or PC,because a LEO lied to get a warrant,and payed a lawyer $1000 + other costs,spent 20 days in jail,40 days on a tether(300+ a month),finally having charges dropped,while expressing to your lawyer(now a judge) about false arrest and having him tell you it's not worth pursuing,that if you can find a lawyer to do it have at it,THEN and ONLY THEN would You really understand how bad our justice system is for even the innocent,let alone being considered a "right wing extremist" according to Napolitano's Rightwing assessment(Christian,anti-gay marraige,NRA member,ex-military,anti-abortion,target shooter,pickup truck driver,etc. etc.).IS that what You call FREEDOM?LIBERTY?CONSTITUTIONAL?Who wants to wait around in jail-prison(and can afford to?) until Your innocence is proven because some leftist Gov person said so?History repeats itself always unless GOOD PEOPLE DO SOMETHING!WE ARE THE GOOD PEOPLE and WE have to educate our fellow citizens that the GOV exists on our VOTE in this Republican Governed Nation!I know the City of WARREN is reading this forum because their lawyers told me so!CARRY ON!

Looks like MOC and MGO are about to lose a lot of members.

This only reinforces my intention of never joining any type of 'group' again, after letting both my MOC and MGO memberships expire recently.

But consider the following scenario…
You object to the way the Federal Leviathan State is run. You gather, every other Tuesday, with others who share your values. We’ll call your fictional group the Constitution League (CL).
One night, a new fellow shows up. He’s frustrated and outspoken. He complains that the time for meetings is over. Something must be done — something that will “get their attention.” You’re uncomfortable with his remarks but unsure how to respond.
You hope he never returns, and he doesn’t.
What you don’t know, until months later, is that one of our CL colleagues, the chapter Vice President, followed the vocal man out to the parking lot. The two exchanged email addresses and phone numbers. Then, your local VP reached out to a third man, a member of a CL chapter in the nearest big city. The three met regularly. They plotted and executed their own terrorist plot on a U.S. Government facility.
Now, your group meeting was the place they met. The Vice President used his CL email account. CL is all over the news. CL is now, for all intents and purposes, a terrorist group.
And you? Well, you’ve donated to the terrorist organization. You’ve participated in its meetings. The night this angry man walked in, you didn’t call the authorities.
* Can the President have the military come and arrest you? Yes!
* Can he (or she) send you to a military tribunal for trial or just hold you indefinitely in a military facility, without charges? Yes!

Click to expand...

fozzy71 said:

Looks like MOC and MGO are about to lose a lot of members.

This only reinforces my intention of never joining any type of 'group' again, after letting both my MOC and MGO memberships expire recently.

Click to expand...

Then your overlords have isolated you. Well done.

We must hang together or we will most assuredly hang separately.

TheQ said:

Then your overlords have isolated you. Well done.

We must hang together or we will most assuredly hang separately.

Click to expand...

Do you really think this type of holier than thou response, to my semi-sarcastic post, is going to win anyone over to your side?

He's just trying to make you think. At this point, I agree with both of you. What to do?...:uhoh:

stainless1911 said:

He's just trying to make you think. At this point, I agree with both of you. What to do?...:uhoh:

Click to expand...

Just carry on.

And, only associate with upstanding rights groups. The government is going to have a hard time making it stick if it pulls the trick quoted above on an upstanding organization. Remember the outrage and uproar when the list of terrorist indicators came out a few years ago? The one with things like believing in the constitution. The bozos who thunk that one up got their butts handed to them by properly outraged citizens and skewered on the pointed ridicule of the freedom worlds' bloggers.

stainless1911 said:

He's just trying to make you think. ..

Click to expand...

I know what he was doing, and I was trying to make him do the same.