Y'know, a veto of the NDAA seems hopeless now.

[baphnedia]

So, that NDAA passed the Senate 93-7.  Doesn't matter if Obama were to veto it... heck based on what I've read from the Wall Street Journal... yeah.  The USA just got really, really ugly.  

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204826704577073271368204202.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

I'm renewing my passport. 

Comments

[tayruu]

I can't seem to see the whole article. (Stops with "The Justice Department, the ...") I don't know if it's NoScript, not being in the US, or not registered, but I think I've got the idea.

WTF.

[baphnedia]

*nods* I read an update, and found that the intent of the provisions was to make the law reflect existing Supreme Court precedent, established in Hamdi vs Rumsfeld in 2004. So, I'm not longer as... OMGWTFBBQ about this now.

[tayruu]

But that still doesn't change the fact they can lock away someone and throw away the key without a trial. Please tell me I'm missing something. This is ridiculous. D>

[baphnedia]

Pretty much. Unfortunately - the little bit of limelight that was shed on this reality was quickly focused on something else. :(

[altivo]

Yet more proof that Congress is completely out of touch with reality and has no concept of the Constitutional limits on its powers. That bill is unconstitutional. There's no way around it.

Unless American voters get off their asses and quit believing the tripe on Fox News, things are going to be very bad here and very quickly. The problem is that most of them will not vote against their incumbent. They will criticize all the other members of Congress, but are afraid to kick out their own moron.

[baphnedia]

Oh, as an update - I found out through CBS (not that I can find the article now) that before the NDAA was passed 93-7, both parties amended the provisions to exclude US Citizens.

Unfortunately, it was at that point that the intent behind the provisions was made clear by Senator Levin (Michigan), in that there is already legal precedent set by the Supreme Court to suspend habeas corpus whenever the hell it wants to, and to whomever it wants to (Hamdi vs Rumsfeld in 2004). So, on the plus side, nothing has changed if you are a US Citizen or legal resident. However, this sheds light on how hard the Supreme Court is protecting the rights and liberties of our citizens.

[altivo]

Or rather, how well the courts and congress both are protecting the rights and privileges of wealthy individuals and corporations. The rest of us are just lemmings to them. They don't care, they no longer have to, They aren't even worried that we could take control back through the elective process. They know they own the ballot box and the media too completely.

The US has become no different from any of the oppressive regimes it has criticized and fought against years ago.