[Fluffy Baby]

Unless you have been living under a rock, you probably heard about the NDAA.

Obama Demanded NDAA Include Americans for Indefinite Detainment

Obama signed the NDAA into law on New Years’ Eve, 2011. In his press release, he said even though he has strong reservations of some of its elements—such as indefinite detention of American citizens without due process of law--he signed it because he needed the funding for the military.

Is this one more step to take away American rights?
Is the NDAA unconstitutional?

Do you agree with the NDAA?

[plan4fate]

I admit, I live under a rock. I've never heard of this before.. so I'm interested in everyone's opinions.

But I'm about 99.99% sure I'm not cool with anyone being detained with out their due process.

[Fluffy Baby]

^ Yeah, I am very very against this. I cannot understand why Americans are not rallying in the streets in DC over this.

[Quantum_Leap]

I don't live under a rock, but I do live in China, so no, I hadn't heard of this yet. Reading now...

[razzledobe]

I'm also 100% against this. I'm absolutely horrified (but not surprised) that this passed a republican house, a democratic senate and a democratic president. Not OK.

[razzledobe]

What I really find disturbing about not only this bill but many others is the poison pills that get shoved into a critical bill. This one being NDAA that got attached to funding for the military

H R 1540 RECORDED VOTE 14-Dec-2011 6:58 PM
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Conference Report
BILL TITLE: To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes

[Repti.Mom]

Originally Posted by razzledobe

What I really find disturbing about not only this bill but many others is the poison pills that get shoved into a critical bill. This one being NDAA that got attached to funding for the military

H R 1540 RECORDED VOTE 14-Dec-2011 6:58 PM
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Conference Report
BILL TITLE: To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes

That is the scary part about A LOT of bills. There is a little fish on the surface, and below there are HUGE FRICKEN POISONOUS fish swimming around. Secretly makes me glad I'm not in a point to have to read in depth and understand all the stuff they pass.

I guess the worst part of it is learning that obama is more of a pushover than everybody thought, and he's going to sign a bunch of "A" just so he can get "B".

[HappyHippy]

I'm also 100% against it.

[BittyBugsMama]

Apparently I live under a rock.

[My2miracles]

Crawling out from under a rock to say that I don't think most American's are rallying in the streets of DC because most don't think it will ever affect them personally.

[Fluffy Baby]

DHS says if you have more than a certain amount of guns, food, ammo, etc, you can be considered a potential terrorists. Don't fool yourself into thinking this could never effect you or your family. (Not YOU, but general you)


This is how Nazi Germany started. Little by little, they took the citizens rights and the rest is history. History repeats itself.

[BittyBugsMama]

Originally Posted by Fluffy Baby

DHS says if you have more than a certain amount of guns, food, ammo, etc, you can be considered a potential terrorists. Don't fool yourself into thinking this could never effect you or your family. (Not YOU, but general you)


This is how Nazi Germany started. Little by little, they took the citizens rights and the rest is history. History repeats itself.

Have a link to where it says that? I'm not finding it

[Fluffy Baby]

Trying to find the exact reports with that info. It could be in this one:

Warning PDFs
http://www.constitution.org/abus/le/...gic-report.pdf

From Infowars, but I could not find it under another URL. http://www.infowars.com/media/rightwing-dhs.pdf

MIAC- MIAC - Missouri Information Analysis Center

Spying on our neighbors- DHS: Secretary Napolitano Announces Expansion of "If You See Something, Say Something" Campaign to Walmart Stores Across the Nation

[BittyBugsMama]

Originally Posted by Fluffy Baby

Trying to find the exact reports with that info. It could be in this one:

Warning PDFs
http://www.constitution.org/abus/le/...gic-report.pdf

From Infowars, but I could not find it under another URL. http://www.infowars.com/media/rightwing-dhs.pdf

MIAC- MIAC - Missouri Information Analysis Center

Spying on our neighbors- DHS: Secretary Napolitano Announces Expansion of "If You See Something, Say Something" Campaign to Walmart Stores Across the Nation

I see two links to info on extremists, a link on partnering to make your community "safer" and an article on Walmart partnering on a government project. Nothing that says anything about stocking weapons, food or ammo getting you labeled a terrorist.

[K.A.T]

Darn just when I thought I moved out...I found myself right back under the rock again.

OK seriously, taking away our rights like that I'm not with in the least bit. But I'm not going to worry about it, just yet.

[foxfire_ga79]

Team RazzleDobe.

This is messed up. I know all politicians do it because it's a matter of give and take, but this was too much. How can anyone, regardless of political party, be Ok with allowing indefinite detention without due process to our citizens?? Isn't that kind of a big deal in our constitution, that we would not live in that fear?
This could affect anybody, eventually. Who's to say who will or who won't be accused of "terrorist activity?"
And I totally agree with LeAnn. Big changes like Nazi Germany don't happen over night. One thing at a time happens until you realize you're living in a nightmare. Even if there is nothing right now that says x amount of guns or more makes you a suspect, that guideline can happen at any time. And that would affect anyone who stockpiles. One thing leads to another and then it's out of control.
This bothers me a lot. Obama should have listen to his reservations on this and come up with something else for the military budget. That's probably easier said than done and I don't have all the answers to these problems, but I think this is potentially very dangerous. And definitely against our constitution as I understand it.

[razzledobe]

Let's hope now that the law has been passed it will be struck down as unconstitutional.

[BittyBugsMama]

But the Bush administration had the same law? Why is it a problem now? From what I've been reading, this law has been reenacted for something like 50 years.... I'm kinda confused about the whole thing. Can anybody help me out here?

NDAA | American Civil Liberties Union Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union

[foxfire_ga79]

I didn't agree with it then and I don't agree with it now. My opinion of this has not changed. It was not Ok when Bush was allowing it. It's not Ok ever.

Apparently I've been living under a rock...