Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate Votes To Let Military Detain Americans Indefinitely, White House Threatens Veto

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:33 PM
Original message
Senate Votes To Let Military Detain Americans Indefinitely, White House Threatens Veto
WASHINGTON -- The Senate voted Tuesday to keep a controversial provision to let the military detain terrorism suspects on U.S. soil and hold them indefinitely without trial -- prompting White House officials to reissue a veto threat.

The measure, part of the massive National Defense Authorization Act, was also opposed by civil libertarians on the left and right. But 16 Democrats and an independent joined with Republicans to defeat an amendment by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) that would have killed the provision, voting it down with 61 against, and 37 for it.

"I'm very, very, concerned about having U.S. citizens sent to Guantanamo Bay for indefinite detention," said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the Senate's most conservative members.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/29/senate-votes-to-let-military-detain-americans-indefinitely_n_1119473.html?ref=politics
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is sickening.
Can we call is fascism yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. Well not really. They only voted so far on the Udall amendment, not the full bill yet
So they have NOT voted yet on the Military Detention section in the FULL bill.

And there is still time for another amendment to be introduced with other wording.

It is normal for several different amendments to be voted on regarding the same issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. The Military Detention section should never even have been proposed.
What in the world were they thinking coming up with this bullshit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Authoritarianism IMO. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Absolutely outrageous. Totally unacceptable to let the military detain anyone indefinitely.
Only Obama should have that right.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BadDog40 Donating Member (138 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. Who are these 16 Dems that support this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a simple pattern Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Traitors all.
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Hagan (D-NC), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Manchin (D-WV), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Nay
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. These are they
Robert Casey-PA, Kent Conrad-ND, Kay Hagan-NC, Daniel Inouye-HI, Herbert Kohl-WI, Mary Landrieu-LA, Carl Levin-MI, Joe Manchin-WV, Claire McCaskill-MO, Robert Menendez-NJ, Ben Nelson-NE, Mark Pryor-AR, John Reed-RI, Jeanne Shaheen-NH, Debbie Ann Stabenow-MI, Sheldon Whitehouse-RI
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. They need to be replaced with real Democrats.
Edited on Tue Nov-29-11 09:48 PM by woo me with science
This is serious. This is no game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
9. veto. veto. veto. It's there for a reason. USE IT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
10. Sheldon Whitehouse voted FOR it?!?
I am very surprised.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
11. "threatens" veto - is that like a John Conyers "stern" letter? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. Buh-bye Constitution:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a simple pattern Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
13. I think I get it
They realized that we realize that there aren't enough cops to beat all the protestors let alone stop a revolution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
14. No surprise to see "songbird" McCain is a chief sponsor of this monstrosity.
McCain and his little goomba Lindsey Graham have repeatedly supported legislation that undermines the Constitutional protections that we have a right to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-11 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
16. Veto. Period. No "threatening." It should be a VOW. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC