The US Senate is hoping to get in the good graces of civil libertarians (if that's even possible) with passage of a measure that amends the dastardly NDAA provision allowing for indefinite detention of US citizens "suspected" of "terrorism."
From the morning wires:
The indefinite detention of American citizens suspected of terrorism and seized on U.S. soil has been challenged by the Senate. A coalition of liberal Democrats and libertarian Republicans backed an amendment to a sweeping defense bill that would bar the practice. The vote was 67-29.
Who are the tyrants that voted to keep the indefinite detention? See the vote breakdown at this link.
That provision has been on the books now all year after President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law New Years day. When there was debate in the senate about the provision, Lindsay Graham essentially declared US soil a war zone in the global war on terror. I think his quote was "if they want a lawyer, tell them no!" What a tyrant. Has he forgotten about due process? Interestingly, Graham voted in favor of amending the provision. Maybe he felt the heat from liberty-minded constituents.
There were some who came out in opposition of the provision, including Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, the son of libertarian Republican congressman Ron Paul. He gave a very compelling speech on the floor condemning the indefinite detention provision.
So now the senate has passed an amendment to repeal that indefinite detention provision. It's funny, because some elected representatives said the provision was taken out before passage. If that's the case why would the senate vote to nix the provision?
We've gotta wait and see what happens in the House for the amendment that would nix the indefinite detention provision from the NDAA. Sadly, area congressmen, including Aaron Schock, voted for NDAA, placing military spending above due process.
He's one of those elected officials who told constituents that the bill didn't have indefinite detention for American citizens. The recent reported actions by the Senate to amend that proves he was wrong. Did he even read the bill before voting on it? Shame, Schock. Shame.
Oh, and how could we forget another provision in NDAA that was meant to allow for Don't Ask Don't Tell to be lifted. When our elected representatives (including Schock) voted for the NDAA, they also voted to allow for our troops to have sexual relations with animals. Don't believe me? Read this article from late last year.
So, apparently, this is a smokescreen. It's a lame duck session. Terrible, bipartisan, things typically happen during a lame duck session. Remember Illinois' recent income tax increase? So, we're originally to think that they removed the provision from the NDAA. Well ...
Then there's this:
"The new statute actually states that persons lawfully in the U.S. can be detained under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force [AUMF]. The original (the statute we are fighting in court) never went that far," Afran said. "Therefore, under the guise of supposedly adding protection to Americans, the new statute actually expands the AUMF to civilians in the U.S."
I guess that's why Senator Lindsay Graham voted for it. Senator Dick Durbin also voted for it. Read the above quoted Business Insider article here. It says the vote actually shakes our understanding of what due process we really have even more to the core. Legalese and technical jargon--the tools of bureaucrats to burden us with taxes, unjust rules, unconstitutional law, and the, now, indefinite detention. Enslavement never has been so systematic before.