With the Senate passage of S.1867 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012  there is lots of talk about a few disturbing provisions. The companion house bill H.R. 1540 didn’t seem to create the stir. Rand Paul brought this issue to light by trying to amend the bill. Now a “conference” between the House and Senate will take place and the bill will then be passed on to the President. Will he Veto it as he has suggested. Not likely. He’s done nothing to safeguard the liberty of Americans to date. Why start now.

But what is all the fuss about?

here is this text that is troublesome:

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

We use the term “belligerent” often in our society. Most do not ascribe this term to “war”.

Websters online defines it as follows:

BELLIGERENT

1:  waging war; specifically : belonging to or recognized as a state at war and protected by and subject to the laws of war
2:  inclined to or exhibiting assertiveness, hostility, or combativeness
Most people who read this think about the 2nd definition and not the first, so you can understand why this bill is or could become a problem. Words have meaning. In Orwell’s 1984 words were often redefined to make laws work against the people or the “enemy” of the day.

But is this much ado about nothing? This bill does have protection for U.S. Citizens.

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

Still… It could one day soon become a problem. All that is needed to make this bill apply to US Citizens would be to remove one small section. As it is the president though bills like the Military Commissions Act and the PATRIOT act has the authority (he thinks he does) to declare you an enemy combatant and detain, assassinate, or rendition you and there is nothing you could do to stop him. Well you could shoot back but you’d likely loose.

So imagine that you posted a video on Youtube the president didn’t like. The NSA,CIA,FBI or whoever asks that you be considered to have “committed a belligerent act” defined as: inclined to or exhibiting assertiveness, hostility, or combativeness.

Goodbye Liberty! Hello Police State!

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Declaration Of Independence

Or how about this “belligerent” text:

What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.

Thomas Jefferson – Original Enemy “Belligerent”

Liberty will not last long with fools that would trade it away for “security”. Security is a cheap whore that will rob you blind and leave you for dead in an alley. It would seem that many in D.C. are hoping for this outcome. We should run from such foolish ambitions of people like John McCain and anyone else that would sell their souls for power. Yet we keep voting for them.

How is that lesser of 2 evils thing working out for us?

Kurt Feigel

Watch and understand the concept of Liberty in the context of this bill as Rand Paul and others who lover liberty see it: