Senate Rejects Amendment Banning Indefinite Detention

[Ibrahim90]

Y'know, when people voted for "change," I didn't think they voted for "change for the worse."

It flummoxes me that anyone with half a mind in america would support this. Even in countries like New Zealand (where I'm from), there would be a public outcry if the government tried to do something like that, even though, due to how the country is set up, they technically can exercise such power. I'd think that in a country like america, with a written, codified, and "technically" upheld constitution, people would be more willing to demand that the government stops abridging their rights and freedoms

you're assuming they even have brains. as it is, I see no evidence that they do. otherwise, they would have at least taken time to read the document, and then realize what travesties are being committed by their government.

[ebalosus]

you're assuming they even have brains. as it is, I see no evidence that they do. otherwise, they would have at least taken time to read the document, and then realize what travesties are being committed by their government.

That just gives me the depressing feeling that the terrorists truly have won

[evensgrey]

Y'know, when people voted for "change," I didn't think they voted for "change for the worse."

It flummoxes me that anyone with half a mind in america would support this. Even in countries like New Zealand (where I'm from), there would be a public outcry if the government tried to do something like that, even though, due to how the country is set up, they technically can exercise such power. I'd think that in a country like america, with a written, codified, and "technically" upheld constitution, people would be more willing to demand that the government stops abridging their rights and freedoms

You'd THINK there would be, wouldn't you?  B ut the current President has declared he can have anyone he wants murdered, and there's nary a peep from most quarters, despite the fact he's already been doing it.

[FSBlueApocalypse]

So I'm getting into arguments with some liberal friends saying Obama signed a bill that now says US citizens aren't subject to indefinite detention? Is that true, or is that something that Obama fanboys are trying to convince themselves of?

[MrBogosity]

No, he signed a bill ALLOWING Americans to be held in indefinite detention!

Obama Expresses "Reservations" But Still Signs Controversial Defense Bill

Avoiding the fanfare often associated with a major bill signing, President Barack Obama quietly signed a controversial defense spending bill over New Year's weekend, angering some civil liberties and human rights groups...the bill attracted significant criticism from certain segments of the population due to provisions related to the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists, including a provision that seems to authorize the indefinite detention without trial of American citizens.

Obama said that he signed the bill into law primarily because if authorizes funding for the defense of the U.S. and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed.

Yes, the ability of Obamatons to deny reality exceeds that of the creationists!

[ebalosus]

What was that quote by Ben Franklin again, the one about how people how sacrifice liberty for security, will get and deserve neither...

[MrBogosity]

"Those who would give up their essential liberty in order to achieve a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."