Comments on: Action Alert: Stop Indefinite Military Detention of US Citizens

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:04:00 +0000

Didn’t Stalin have his gulags and Hitler his ghettos? Call it a retraining center doesn’t make it stink any less. Its ambiguous to say the least and a crime against the Constitution and “We the People” to say the most.

By: Wesley Mcgranor

Wesley Mcgranor — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 15:55:00 +0000

I wouldn’t doubt it.

By: Annie

Annie — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:47:00 +0000

Please forgive me I am just trying to wrap my mind around what all this means or could mean. I’ve listened to the speeches from Rand Paul, but I am still confused as to what exactly the opposition to this is? Does this section mean this applies to anyone basically who is trying to overthrow the government like in Egypt when they had the spring riots? (B) to have participated in the course of
22 planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
23 attack against the United States or its coalition

Is that the point- that we would no longer be able to overthrow the government if it became tyrannical without the threat of detention without trial? I’m confused by all this language! Help me out.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:53:00 +0000

It took more than 24 hours for my response from John Cornyn to reach me.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:52:00 +0000

1031, the immediate previous section. You guys should all watch yesterday’s debate on the Udall amendment. John McCain clearly says that the bill would allow for indefinite detention of US citizens and he wrote the thing.

By: Landnnut

Landnnut — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:18:00 +0000

its an automated response so I should be getting it no matter how busy they are.

By: Gary T

Gary T — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:29:00 +0000

What I sent to my Senators:

As our representatives, you are supposed to be protecting Americans, not only from foreign threats but from governmental domestic threats as well.This legislation is the road to the Nazification of America.The people will not stand for this much longer, and as in the middle east we will vote to change our so called leaders.You pass this legislation at the risk of political suicide. Voters who have never even cared about the political process are becoming aware of the encroachment of civil liberties our government is effecting.
Do not vote for this horrendous set of laws.

By: Mr. Klein

Mr. Klein — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:28:00 +0000

which section?

By: Mr. Klein

Mr. Klein — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:26:00 +0000

Mr wolf, I also agree with you regarding section 1031-32. if those items were struck that may allow for the very thing which we appose.
a larger problem is the defense spending. this bill should be defeated on ths face of its spending alone. we need to bring the troops home and stop the “rent seekers” for stealing more of our money…

Troop levels are increasing, and why are we buying more military hardware such as the Joint strike fighter? our economy is imploding, we need tax cuts and spending cuts…. I cant believe there is not a balance budget amendment on the table, which would reassert gold as the only legal tender specie of the USA… that what we need to be discussing.

saving our economy is a national security imperative!

By: diverduck

diverduck — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 05:35:00 +0000

When I checked on the bill and the amendments, it appears that 1067 was submitted by Kelly Ayotte, not Rand Paul and it didn’t seem to me to be really that relevant.

On a seemingly different topic:
When I looked for the amendments, I found text authorizing the Comptroller General to investigate each states actions related to voter id laws and report on them and prosecutions for voter fraud, etc. It is time the Feds stayed out of voter laws … As I recall the Constitution gives voter legislation to the states. There are too many Fed employees, they stick their noses into places that they have no business.