Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

naaman fletcher

(7,362 posts)
Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:49 PM Dec 2012

NDAA 2013 - Indefinite detention without trial is back [View all]

Source: Russia Today

Lawmakers in Washington have stripped an amendment from next year’s National Defense Authorization Act that could have kept the government from indefinitely detaining US citizens without charge or trial.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Michigan) told reporters on Tuesday that an amendment to the 2013 defense spending bill approved only two weeks earlier had been removed. That amendment, authored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), was pitched as a solution to a clause in the current NDAA that allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens without due process or habeas corpus.

Under the 2012 NDAA, US President Barack Obama is affirmed the power to put any American citizen behind bars if he or she is suspected of assisting in any way with forces engaged in hostilities against the United States or its allies. That provision, Sec. 1021, says any person who commits a “belligerent act” against the country can be imprisoned indefinitely “without trial” until the vaguely-worded period of hostilities has come to an end.

Pres. Obama signed the 2012 NDAA into law on December 31 of last year, but included a statement at the time that condemned the powers under Sec. 1021 that he awarded himself.

Read more: http://rt.com/usa/news/ndaa-indefinite-detention-trial-403/



We need to pressure the whitehouse to veto the bill until indefinite detention is stripped
32 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How about a source NOT from RT? n/t a geek named Bob Dec 2012 #1
Would you accept, say, the NY Times? naaman fletcher Dec 2012 #2
much better! a geek named Bob Dec 2012 #3
I don't get it... why would Carl Levin put this back on the table? lib2DaBone Dec 2012 #4
The proposed NDAA for 2013 doesn’t clarify what constitutes a (belligerent) Rwolf Dec 2012 #21
"he awarded himself"? CitizenPatriot Dec 2012 #5
Bullcrap. If he signs is he buys it. nm rhett o rick Dec 2012 #10
Sure are a lot of RT bashers just1voice Dec 2012 #19
us media is utterly worthless green for victory Dec 2012 #22
The government does not have the right to detain citizens indefinitely without habeas & due process. Vattel Dec 2012 #6
LOL. Are you being sarcastic? The government has detained citizens indefinitely w/o habeas corpus. rhett o rick Dec 2012 #11
You need to distinguish doing something and having a right to do it. Vattel Dec 2012 #23
My point is that if we citizens dont care that the government is walking on our rights rhett o rick Dec 2012 #25
The American people have looked the other way while our government violates the Constitution green for victory Dec 2012 #26
Not sure why you think that you need to tell me that. I was of course rhett o rick Dec 2012 #27
Sorry, I missed your point. I guess we agree. Vattel Dec 2012 #28
Sometimes my points are a little hard to follow. At least for myself. rhett o rick Dec 2012 #29
George Takei is one of many Japanese US citizens who spent years in US prison camps during WWII. Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #14
Obama did not have to sign this monstrosity. He also didn't have to send lawyers to reinstate it Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #7
Those of us that thought that when we got a Democrat in the presidency, what Bush screwed up would rhett o rick Dec 2012 #12
Did he sign it this year democrattotheend Dec 2012 #20
No, the 2012 NDAA has not been signed. tammywammy Dec 2012 #24
Obama WANTS Indefinite Detention in the bill. blkmusclmachine Dec 2012 #8
Would you expect a president to give away power? nm rhett o rick Dec 2012 #30
well election season is indeed over it seems azurnoir Dec 2012 #9
You don't know about NDAA section 1021, HR347, the Patriot Act extension, etc.? Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #15
no I was simply being circumspect in my reply n/t azurnoir Dec 2012 #16
What we really need need is scotus to rule it cstanleytech Dec 2012 #13
not a frickin chance with this scotus. and since 9/11 the courts have usually been pretty wimpy on struggle4progress Dec 2012 #18
I think they have had two chances to rule on it and have blundered both times. nm rhett o rick Dec 2012 #31
You came for Their Is That All There Is Dec 2012 #17
No one "opened the Document for interpretation," The Constitution has been open for rhett o rick Dec 2012 #32
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»NDAA 2013 - Indefinite de...