# Liberty Movement > Defenders of Liberty > Justin Amash Forum >  NDAA Indefinite Detention Vote - Smith-Amash Amendment Fails 182-238 (roll call inside)

## tsai3904

*UPDATE*:

The Smith-Amash amendment failed by a vote of 182-238:
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill...ion-on-us-soil

roll call:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll270.xml


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The House will be voting on amendments to the 2013 NDAA bill TODAY.

Please contact your Congressman and urge him to *SUPPORT the Smith-Amash amendment to the 2013 NDAA*.

The amendment explicitly bans indefinite detention and military commissions from the US and repeals section 1022 from the 2012 NDAA.  The amendment also guarantees that persons arrested on U.S. soil under the Afghanistan AUMF or the NDAA will be charged for their alleged wrongdoing and will receive a fair trial.

Justin Amash said the Republican leadership is pushing the Gohmert amendment, which says "you get due process if you're entitled to due process. Sounds nice but doesn't do anything."

Here's a great fact sheet Amash wrote to counter all the myths against indefinite detention:
http://amash.house.gov/sites/amash.h...ct%20Sheet.pdf

*Find your Congressman here*:
http://house.gov/representatives/

Again, urge them to *SUPPORT the Smith-Amash amendment* and *OPPOSE the Gohmert amendment* to the 2013 NDAA to protect our Constitutional rights.

Stay up to date on this issue by following Justin Amash on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash?v=wall

*Co-Sponsors:*

Justin Amash (R-MI-3)
Howard Berman (D-CA-28)
John Duncan, Jr (R-TN-2)
John Garamendi (D-CA-10)
Paul Gosar (R-AZ-1)
Mazie Hirono (D-HI-2)
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX-18)
Hank Johnson, Jr (D-GA-4)
Raul Labrador (R-ID-1)
Ron Paul (R-TX-14)
Adam Smith (D-WA-9) (Sponsor)
Scott Tipton (R-CO-3)

*Supporters:*

John Conyers, Jr (D-MI-14)
Morgan Griffith (R-VA-9)
Barbara Lee (D-CA-9)
George Miller (D-CA-7)
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY-8)
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-8)
Chellie Pingree (D-ME-1)

*Against:*

Louie Gohmert (R-TX-1)
Jeff Landry (R-LA-3)
Howard McKeon (R-CA-25)
Tom Rooney (R-FL-16)
Mac Thornberry (R-TX-13)
Allen West (R-FL-22)




Ron Paul speaking in support of the Smith-Amash amendment.

----------


## cassielund99@gmail.com

Actually a federal judge in New York yesterday already put a stop to that part of the NDAA.  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ork-judge.html

----------


## tsai3904

> Actually a federal judge in New York yesterday already put a stop to that part of the NDAA.  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ork-judge.html


That is not the final say on this issue.  There have been many federal judges who have invalidated ObamaCare but the issue still remains.

Also, the article says this:




> Forrest’s order prevents enforcement of the provision of the statute *pending further order of the court or an amendment to the statute by Congress*.

----------


## lib3rtarian

I called my rep Brad Miller and spoke to a lady in his office. Explained the issue, left my name and address. Now I only need to wait for FBI to come knock on my door.

----------


## Okie RP fan

Called my rep. just now.

----------


## No1butPaul

I called my rep too, Brad Sherman.  I gave my info to the lady who answered and asked if she had been receiving a lot of calls today - she said yes.  I told her how important this is and she said she would pass that on to BS (yes, I am initialing him on purpose).  I asked if he would be in the office before he takes the vote and she said yes.  Then I asked that when she tells BS, to put her hands on each shoulder and shake him for me.  She was giggling and I was serious.  Maybe she will think it's funny enough that she'll actually do it!

----------


## Martin Silenus

Does anyone know what amendment number this is? There's a lot of amendments, and I'm sure Amash has more than one.

----------


## tsai3904

> Does anyone know what amendment number this is? There's a lot of amendments, and I'm sure Amash has more than one.


Amendment #151 but it is referred to as the Smith-Amash amendment by Justin Amash in all his letters to his colleagues.  Also, this is the only Smith-Amash amendment.

----------


## jkr

IS THERE AN HR # YET?

NEED IT!


OOOPS!
IM
 L8!

----------


## tsai3904

> IS THERE AN HR # YET?


These amendments are usually referred to by their names.  Amash has written several letters to all his colleagues and published several articles and not once does he mention the Amendment #.  He refers to it as the Smith-Amash amendment.  Stick to using that phrase because that is what it's known by..the Smith-Amash amendment to the 2013 NDAA.

----------


## Tiso0770

Why amendments?, why not abolish NDAA altogether?.

----------


## sailingaway

I did.

NDAA is the overall defense funding bill. You can't get rid of the whole thing, but this part should be a no brainer.

----------


## Martin Silenus

Did some more research. HR4310 is the 2013 NDAA. Like someone said above, Amendment No. 151 is the Smith-Amash amendment.

 Also important is Amendment No.95 which is sponsored by Rep. Conyers (MI), but also has Dr. Paul as a cosponsor. This amendment would make sure that nothing in the bill may be construed as authorizing military action against Iran. 

For more on how HR4310 authorizes military action, see Rep. Kucinich's article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-de...b_1524474.html

----------


## tsai3904

> Also important is Amendment No.95 which is sponsored by Rep. Conyers (MI), but also has Dr. Paul as a cosponsor. This amendment would make sure that nothing in the bill may be construed as authorizing military action against Iran.


Thanks.  These are the amendments Ron Paul has co-sponsored:

*Conyers Amendment #95*
Would clarify that nothing in the bill shall be construed as authorizing the use of force against Iran.

*McGovern Amednment #101*
Would require that the President carry out accelerated transition from U.S. Armed Forces to the Government of Afghanistan of combat operations by no later than the end of 2013; of military and security operations by the end of 2014, accompanied by the redeployment of U.S. troops; and pursue robust negotiations to address Afghanistan’s and the region’s security and stability. It is the sense of Congress that should the president determine the necessity for post-2014 deployment of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, the Congress should authorize any such presence of troops.

*Smith-Amash Amendment #151*
Would strike section 1022 of the FY2012 NDAA and amends Section 1021 of same Act to eliminate indefinite military detention of any person detained under AUMF authority in US, territories or possessions by providing immediate transfer to trial and proceedings by a court established under Article III of the Constitution of the United states or by an appropriate State court.

----------


## jmdrake

This is very important!  I wish we'd been talking more about this during the past week instead of gay marriage and campaign emails.

----------


## Noob

Please support the NDAA-neutering amendment to H.R. 4310.

http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/a...ertid=61337441

----------


## tsai3904

Debate has not started and many Representatives are in their office RIGHT NOW reviewing the 142 amendments that will be up for vote later today.

NOW is the time to call or email your Representative.  They do feel pressure when they are contacted regarding the same issue by constituents.  It makes them actually take a second look on the issue.

----------


## libertyjam

My letter to my congressman:





> Please support Mr. Amash and Mr. Smith's amendment to the NDAA bill in voting today.  This is the Smith-Amash amendment to the 2013 NDAA.  The previous bill passed was a complete travesty for all Americans and tramples constitutional rights, one NY judge has already struck down the portions of the 2012 NDAA that effectively nullify 4th and 5th amendment rights.  YOU can help rectify this abomination!  If it is not changed it will lead only to more needless legal battles and can potentially harm many innocent Americans. I know you voted for this unconstitutional legislation originally and how extremely out of character it was for you to support a bill that in no way makes Americans any safer and assumes power.  If you do not support remedying this situation it will be remembered when you have an opponent for your seat at election time.

----------


## LKMN

done.

----------


## John F Kennedy III

I read that as Contact Your Pepsi. I'm gonna go get some coffee...

----------


## Pisces

Just contacted Kevin Brady and asked him to vote yes on the Smith-Amash amendment.

----------


## tsai3904

Wow...Nancy Pelosi just said on the House floor that she is in full support of the Smith-Amash amendment.

If she can get full Democratic support for the amendment, we will not need many Republicans to get it passed.

KEEP CALLING!

----------


## opinionatedfool

To the OP, thanks so much for posting. I called my Rep. 

To everyone else, please take a minute and call yours. It literally takes a minute.

----------


## jonruh52

I contacted Todd Young, the supposed Tea Party darling of southern Indiana, and I got an automated response saying he helped author the NDAA bill and it was constitutional to provide for the common defense.  I hate this guy.  I knew he was full of crap when he ran here.  He just had it too easy getting elected because he ran against Baron Hill, a Democrat that was basically a lobbyist for years.

----------


## opinionatedfool

> I contacted Todd Young, the supposed Tea Party darling of southern Indiana, and I got an automated response saying he helped author the NDAA bill and it was constitutional to provide for the common defense.  I hate this guy.  I knew he was full of crap when he ran here.  He just had it too easy getting elected because he ran against Baron Hill, a Democrat that was basically a lobbyist for years.


What a fool.

----------


## badger4RP

Rep Petri of WI 6th contacted

----------


## tsai3904

Ron Paul speaking in support of the Smith-Amash amendment.  We all know this is one of Ron Paul's TOP issues.  He has mentioned this issue on every one of his campus rallies.

Please take some time to contact your Congressman.

----------


## John F Kennedy III

> Wow...Nancy Pelosi just said on the House floor that she is in full support of the Smith-Amash amendment.
> 
> If she can get full Democratic support for the amendment, we will not need many Republicans to get it passed.
> 
> KEEP CALLING!


Don't ever put any trust in her. But this scenario would be awesome

----------


## John F Kennedy III

Just called Dennis Cardoza (CA-18)

----------


## tsai3904

DownsizeDC is supporting the Smith-Amash amendment.  They have a pre-written letter you can use.

http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/urgen...daa-kidnapping

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> Thanks.  These are the amendments Ron Paul has co-sponsored:
> 
> *Conyers Amendment #95*
> Would clarify that nothing in the bill shall be construed as authorizing the use of force against Iran.
> 
> *McGovern Amednment #101*
> Would require that the President carry out accelerated transition from U.S. Armed Forces to the Government of Afghanistan of combat operations by no later than the end of 2013; of military and security operations by the end of 2014, accompanied by the redeployment of U.S. troops; and pursue robust negotiations to address Afghanistan’s and the region’s security and stability. It is the sense of Congress that should the president determine the necessity for post-2014 deployment of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, the Congress should authorize any such presence of troops.
> 
> *Smith-Amash Amendment #151*
> Would strike section 1022 of the FY2012 NDAA and amends Section 1021 of same Act to eliminate indefinite military detention of any person detained under AUMF authority in US, territories or possessions by providing immediate transfer to trial and proceedings by a court established under Article III of the Constitution of the United states or by an appropriate State court.


And don't forget the other amendments, they are very important too.

----------


## surf

my neocon congressman is getting a lot of messages on this today. just talked to his aide and and asked if he'd received many calls on this. "oh yeah! this is a hot-topic deal." good work people.

edit: when will vote take place?

----------


## tsai3904

> when will vote take place?


There are 142 amendments so the vote on this amendment might be very late tonight.  They haven't even started debating the amendments yet so there is still plenty of time to contact your Reps.

----------


## jovasi

I sent my rep an email.  She better vote yea, or there'll be hell to pay (hey, that rhymed) .

----------


## sailingaway

> There are 142 amendments so the vote on this amendment might be very late tonight.  They haven't even started debating the amendments yet so there is still plenty of time to contact your Reps.


they gave only 2 mnutes discussion to each amendment when they decided to move up CISPA a day on the vote.  It can go fast when they want it to.  Don't delay!

----------


## LibertyEagle

I called mine first thing this morning.

----------


## tsai3904

Actually not much time left...it looks like the House started voting on amendments.

Edit:  Nevermind.  Amendments have not been debated yet.  The House is voting on something else.

----------


## Okaloosa

I have created events on the local Ron Paul facebook groups I'm in with Phone bombs to my Rep.  If you can do that with the information to their DC office maybe we can sway some reps.  This is big so we need to get the word out to everyone via message.

----------


## Anti Federalist

NH-1 Guinta contacted.

The neo-cons over at the Wall Street Journal landed with both feet on Amash for this amendment.

You're all a bunch of American hating pinkos and lefties, according to them.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...d-Justin-Amash

----------


## ChristopherShelley

done.

----------


## tsai3904

Pre-written letter from the ACLU:




> The Smith-Amash amendment repeals the mandatory military detention requirement and bans indefinite detention and military commissions from the United States.
> 
> I believe that the NDAA does not authorize military detention here at home, and that it would be illegal for the government to use it that way.  But I also know that powerful members of Congress continue to argue that it is ok for the military to lock people up without charge or trial here at home.  An explicit statutory ban is needed to ensure that no president or any other government official will ever try to use these practices in the United States itself.  
> 
> I understand that there is a provision in the NDAA currently that provides that the right of habeas corpus is available in the United States .  This does not satisfy my concerns.  The question with the NDAA has never been whether habeas rights are lost. Instead, the question is whether and when any president can order the military to imprison a person without charge or trial, and the habeas provision won't stop any president from ordering the military lockup of civilians without charge or trial -- it will just score political points.  By contrast, the Smith-Amash amendment solves a real problem.


https://ssl.capwiz.com/aclu/issues/a...ms=web_ndaa_ac

----------


## sailingaway

bump

----------


## tsai3904

Adam Smith (sponsor of amendment) is speaking out about the amendment right now on C-Span.

----------


## tsai3904

Mac Thornberry (R-TX-13) speaking against the Smith-Amash amendment.  He is arguing that the amendment will give illegal aliens full Constitutional rights.

----------


## sailingaway

> Mac Thornberry (R-TX-13) speaking against the Smith-Amash amendment.  He is arguing that the amendment will give any person full Constitutional rights.


due process rights?  I mean I understand about funding attorneys, that was the place we historically thought taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for foreigners, but a trial at all?  Come on.

That's like saying if someone were accused of robbery and were a foreigner we could just throw them in jail without a trial.

----------


## tsai3904

There are less than 40 people on the House floor right now.  Most are probably in their office reviewing amendments.

There is still time to call your Rep.

----------


## tsai3904

Still time to contact your Congressman.

----------


## tsai3904

Amash says the vote will be later today or tomorrow morning.  Keep contacting your Congressman.

See the letter he just wrote to his colleagues:
http://amash.house.gov/sites/amash.h...rColleague.pdf

----------


## sailingaway

bump

----------


## tsai3904

Amash on Facebook:




> Here's an example of the extreme rhetoric the House Armed Services Committee is using to persuade Republicans to oppose the Smith-Amash Amendment, which protects AMERICANS' due process rights when the government ACCUSES someone of being "associated" with terrorists:
> 
> "The terrible day may come when we get hit again. On that day, do you want to be the one vote that ended the interrogation of terrorists? Do you want to be the one vote who gave the enemy more constitutional rights than our soldiers have?"

----------


## tsai3904

There's still time to contact your Rep.

If you don't feel like calling, you can send a pre-written email from the ACLU or the Gun Owners of America.

I would suggest sending the ACLU email if you live in a Democratic district and the GOA email if you live in a Republican district.

ACLU:
https://ssl.capwiz.com/aclu/issues/a...ms=web_ndaa_ac

GOA:
http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/a...ertid=61337441

----------


## sailingaway

apparently they just approved the first block of amendments including that military contractors cant be replaced by DOD employees without specific reasons..... what besides crony capitalism could possibly justify that being made law?

Also an amendment that evidence by drones couldn't be used in court unless obtained by court order.  I'd be happier about that if it didn't seem to imply that it is ok to use the evidence to LEAD to evidence in court, throwing out the 'fruit of the poisonous tree' doctrine, if that is actually how it is written.  But hopefully if so that part won't stand up in court.

----------


## seraphson

What exactly do you say when you call your rep up? I'm assuming you get a secretary of the office? Just curious so I'm a little prepared at least.

----------


## tsai3904

Yea, a secretary or an aide will pick up.

Just say that you want to urge your Congressman to support the Smith-Amash amendment to the 2013 NDAA bill.  Say that you are concerned that American citizens can be indefinitely detained without charge or trial and only the Smith-Amash amendment will make it explicitly clear that this cannot happen in the US.

That's all you have to say.  They will probably ask for your address to confirm that you live in the Congressman's district.

----------


## sailingaway

> What exactly do you say when you call your rep up? I'm assuming you get a secretary of the office? Just curious so I'm a little prepared at least.


Some have long chats.  I just say that I'd like them to convey to Congressman ____________ that (my name), a constituent, is asking him to support the Smith Amash amendment to end the indefinite detention without due process provision of NDAA.

----------


## tsai3904

Senators John McCain, Jon Kyl, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte just released a statement AGAINST the Smith-Amash amendment.

http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/...0-3f11096192d3

They are afraid that this amendment might pass!

Keep up the pressure by contacting your Congressman.  Call or email them to support the Smith-Amash amendment.

----------


## row333au

Sarcastic TV.....

Good Morning fellow Americans.... 
Today you are less free than yesterday..... 

Just never mind and just downright ignore the dictatorial nazi communist police state laws happening.....
Its all in keeping up for you're safety and getting you more organized..... So just let it pass by...... its all for you're own good

Far too complex for you're citizen simple head, cause everything is more complicated as nothing is as simple than anyone thinks...... 

The result of warming up to the government keeps the authorities at bay but if you chose to give the government the cold shoulders and start questioning, doubting, or hell forbids challenging the government, you will experience Indefinite Detentions Without Due Process..... Within low pressure you will be re-educated for you're own good in FEMA camps, but any high pressure you build up against the government gets you to direct to Gitmo, where their fun begins....

But overall, the extended forecast will still be less freedom with amassing Patriotic Act in our own private homes with a likely chance of spy monitoring along with a slight chance of Drones.

Stay Patriotic and follow you're government..... Enjoy you're day!!!!

----------


## tsai3904

Justin Amash and Adam Smith just released an op-ed:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76460.html


There's still time to put pressure on your Congressman.  One simple call stating that you want your Congressman to support the Smith-Amash amendment to the NDAA bill so that it is explicitly clear that no American citizen can be held indefinitely without a charge or trial will send a strong message if enough of us do it.  Many people have already commented that aides have said they are receiving a lot of calls on this issue.

----------


## Warmon

> Senators John McCain, Jon Kyl, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte just released a statement AGAINST the Smith-Amash amendment.


WTF? Why are they coming out against this when it's still in the house? Their job is to represent their state governments interest / laws...and that's their only job. They need to STFU!

----------


## tsai3904

> WTF? Why are they coming out against this when it's still in the house? Their job is to represent their state governments interest / laws...and that's their only job. They need to STFU!


Well McCain is the author of the provision allowing the indefinite detentions so I can see why he's coming out strongly against the Smith-Amash amendment.  Releasing a press release on this though shows that he is worried it might pass.  We need to keep up the pressure because it may still be awhile before the amendment is voted on.

----------


## Warmon

> Well McCain is the author of the provision allowing the indefinite detentions so I can see why he's coming out strongly against the Smith-Amash amendment.  Releasing a press release on this though shows that he is worried it might pass.  We need to keep up the pressure because it may still be awhile before the amendment is voted on.


If he's the author and all for it, then he ought to be sent back to Vietnam for six months of re-education.

----------


## row333au

*NDAA ALREADY HAPPENED IN ARGENTINA*

The military junta at the time passed a law nearly exactly like NDAA.... research and evaluate 




> The Dirty War, from 1976-1983, was a seven-year campaign by the Argentine government against suspected dissidents and subversives. Many people, both opponents of the government as well as innocent people, were "disappeared" in the middle of the night. They were taken to secret government detention centers where they were tortured and eventually killed. These people are known as "los desaparecidos" or "the disappeared."





> This military junta maintained its grip on power by cracking down on anybody whom they believed was challenging their authority. Casualty counts from this war range from 10,000 to 30,000 people.


http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../argentina.htm

----------


## tsai3904

The House is beginning to debate amendments for the NDAA bill again.

If you haven't contacted your Representative, send them an email now and urge them to support the Smith-Amash amendment to the NDAA bill.

http://house.gov/representatives/

----------


## RickyJ

The sad thing about all this is that even if we get the indefinite detention of American citizens without a trial removed from this bill, they will still do it as they always have. They never needed a law to to do it, they are just in our face now and don't care that we know what they are doing. Before 9/11 the TSA would not have been tolerated, now people go along with it thinking it somehow protects them from terrorists. The control the elite have over the masses through propaganda delivered through schools, corporate media, and Hollywood is making it very easy for them to control us.

----------


## tsai3904

Vote on the amendment will occur Friday.

----------


## cstarace

> Vote on the amendment will occur Friday.


Which is today. Anybody who contacts their representative, post here, I'll provide +reppage.

----------


## sailingaway

> Which is today. Anybody who contacts their representatives, post here, I'll provide +reppage.


I did!!

----------


## cstarace

> I did!!


Excellent, keep up the pressure guys!

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

Sorry guys, I'm not going to bother contacting Darrell Issa.

I think we all know why.

----------


## sailingaway

> Sorry guys, I'm not going to bother contacting Darrell Issa.
> 
> I think we all know why.


consider it pestering him.

----------


## ord33

Thankfully my Congressman, John Duncan (TN), usually votes in line with Justin Amash and Ron Paul. Congressman Duncan is a co-sponsor of the Smith-Amash amendment and was recently awarded by the National Taxpayers Union the Taxpayer's Best Friend (Ron Paul used to be #1) - voting most in line with reducing spending and cutting taxes for 2011. It is pretty good to not have to complain all the time to my Congressman!

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Senators John McCain, Jon Kyl, Lindsey Graham and *Kelly Ayotte* just released a statement AGAINST the Smith-Amash amendment.


God, that $#@!ing broad is just *awful*.

For all the progress we make in NH, our federal representation sucks balls.

She's been cozying up to the very worst in the Senate since day one.

Rest assured, she'll have a 30 year career in politics. Even if we vote her out, she'll have worked the system to the point of having permanent employment, re-treading between GOP administrations and a Fox News broadcaster in the out years.

----------


## JJ2

I emailed my Representative and then looked at the list of co-sponsors and was shocked to see that he is already sponsoring the amendment!

How did we get so many co-sponsors/supporters (even Pelosi?!) when there were only a handful (was it 6?) "No" votes last year? Did they vote for it just because it was the huge annual defense bill?? (EDIT: I must have been thinking of the Senate, where only 6 republicans and 13 overall voted Nay. But Pelosi did vote "Yes" in 2011.)

----------


## dennydem40z

Call your Congresspeople at 2022243121 and tell them to support the Smith-Amash Indefinite Detention provision in the NDAA to stop the President from being able to detain US Citizens and put them in club Gitmo without DUE PROCESS:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76462.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-actio...-in-the-senate

CALL TODAY THE VOTE STARTS EARLY FRIDAY AT 1:00 PM Call Early.

THANK YOU

----------


## LibertyEagle

They are voting RIGHT NOW.  Say a prayer or hold good thoughts, please.

----------


## ronpaulfollower999

Smith amendment has failed.

----------


## LibertyEagle

Did it really?    What were the vote totals?

----------


## LibertyEagle

What was the number of the amendment, so I can look up the roll call?  Anyone know?

----------


## ronpaulfollower999

> Did it really?    What were the vote totals?


182-238

----------


## LibertyEagle

Do you know the bill number?  I want to see the roll call.

----------


## Massachusetts

The Roll Call is not up yet

----------


## Root

HR4192.

----------


## LibertyEagle

I am pretty sure that my POS, whining, Congressman voted against it.  He usually always votes with whatever the GOP leadership says.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

*Lawmakers back indefinite detention for terror suspects in US  *  
                                                                                   By Jeremy Herb and Pete Kasperowicz                                                                                 -                                                                                      05/18/12 09:48 AM ET                    
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill...medium=twitter

In two votes Friday morning, the House backed the president’s  powers to indefinitely detain terror suspects captured on U.S. soil.

*Lawmakers rejected an amendment that would have barred military detention for terror suspects captured in the United States on a 182-231 vote*, 

beating back the proposal from *a coalition of liberal Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans led by Reps. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and Justin Amash (R-Mich.).*


Instead, the House passed, by a vote of 243-173, an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) sponsored by Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Jeff Landry (R-La.) and Scott Rigell (R-Va.) that affirmed U.S. citizens would not be denied habeas corpus rights.

  Smith and Amash had hoped to attract enough support from libertarian-leaning Republicans to pass their measure, but only 19  Republicans voted for it, while 19 Democrats voted against.

The detainee fight is shaping up to be one of the biggest for this  year's $643 billion defense authorization bill. The issue nearly  derailed passage of last year's version.  
Smith’s amendment would have changed last year’s defense authorization legislation and the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) so that terror suspects captured on U.S. soil would be handled by civilian courts, not the military.
  The debate on the detainee amendments began after midnight Thursday, as part of a late night on the House floor to get through more than 140 amendments to the defense authorization bill.

  Smith argued that indefinite detention gave the president an “extraordinary” amount of power, and said the federal courts have successfully prosecuted hundreds of terrorists since the Sept. 11 attacks.

  Smith and his allies said Gohmert’s amendment was redundant, since it affirms what is already true — that American citizens have habeas corpus rights.
  Gohmert’s amendment was “offered as a smokescreen,” Smith said.
  “It doesn’t protect any rights whatsoever,” he said.

  But supporters of indefinite detention suggested that the Smith-Amash amendment would incentivize terrorists to come to the United States, because they would receive more rights on U.S. soil than outside the country.

*Gohmert suggested at one point that terrorists “supported” Smith’s amendment.* 

  “We cannot look to guarantee those who seek to harm the U.S. the constitutional rights granted to Americans,” said Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.). “If we extend that to them, this war on terror, now it’s a criminal action.”

  Like the detainee issue last year, the debate in the wee hours of Friday morning saw the two sides often talking past one another. 
  Both sides have claimed the Constitution and the courts are on their side, but legal experts say the federal courts have yet to take a firm position about terror suspects on U.S. soil being detained indefinitely. 
  At the heart of the debate is a disagreement over whether terrorist suspects should be granted Miranda rights, and whether constitutional protections should be extended to terrorists.
  Opponents of indefinite detention say that the Constitution covers “all persons,” not just U.S. citizens, so anyone captured on American soil should be granted rights to the court system.

*Backers of indefinite detention say that terrorists should not be given the right to remain silent*, as the United States must have the ability to extract intelligence from them to stop future attacks.

^^^^^^^^ aka Torture, Assassinate, & Murder

----------


## JK/SEA

eff it. i hope 'they' double down on the fascist police state. there should be L-RADs in every neighborhood. i hope they start taking our guns, i wish they would nullify the constitution and start bringing in foreign troops to arrest anyone for the hell of it......lets do it.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

Tea Party and other freedom orgs need to vote these 3 Fascist clowns out in primaries:  


> sponsored by Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Jeff Landry (R-La.) and Scott Rigell (R-Va.)

----------


## Dissent

I wanna see if my congressman voted for it.I bet he did.

----------


## LibertyEagle

If he would have limited it to U.S. citizens, I bet it would have passed.

----------


## Brett85

Had I been a member of Congress, I would've voted in favor of Justin's amendment, since it's the only amendment that makes sure that no U.S citizen will ever be indefinitely detained by the military.

However, the wording in Justin's amendment was flawed in that it didn't simply prevent the government from indefinitely detaining U.S citizens. It also applied to foreigners captured in the U.S as well. Regardless of whether you think foreigners have the same legal rights as U.S citizens, many Republicans in the house who voted against the NDAA the first time voted against this amendment, because it applied to foreigners rather than simply U.S citizens. I think Justin's amendment would've had a good chance of passing had it contained language clarifying that the amendment only applied to U.S citizens. That's something that Justin needs to think about when crafting future amendments.

----------


## tsai3904

> I think Justin's amendment would've had a good chance of passing had it contained language clarifying that the amendment only applied to U.S citizens. That's something that Justin needs to think about when crafting future amendments.


The basis of his argument is that the Constitution applies to all PERSONS.

http://amash.house.gov/sites/amash.h...ngargument.pdf

----------


## LibertyEagle

> The basis of his argument is that the Constitution applies to all PERSONS.
> 
> http://amash.house.gov/sites/amash.h...ngargument.pdf


And that is why it lost.  I understand his reasoning, but if all we could obtain right now is get Americans' rights restored, I would have taken that and then tried to get the other in another amendment.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> consider it pestering him.


I'll save my venom for a face-to-face meeting, if I ever get one.

----------


## jmdrake

Ah hell!  I'm pissed!   You know why I'm pissed?  *Because we had no organized effort to fight for this amendment!*  Just a couple of thread with only a handful of posts!  When I saw this yesterday I didn't get a chance to do anything because I was tied up all day and figured I'd missed the boat.  At least I made sure to donate to the campaign.  Then I saw this today, saw I had one more chance and made the call.  But I realize it's now too little two late.  We had a freaking week of endless threads over Rand's "gayer" remark followed by another week of people parsing, crying and moaning over ever stinking email that came out of the campaign.  "Did Paul really write this?"  *Of course he did!*  "Did the CIA get to Paul"?  *Of course they did NOT!  And if they did it wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference!*  The campaign just told us what we already knew.  Actually capturing the nomination is beyond a long shot.  Throwing good money after bad in statewide TV ads in remaining primaries is a dumb idea.  It's best to keep trying to get as many delegates as possible and see what we can do with that.  That should have been the end of it.  But *nooooooo*.  We've got folks running around wanting "refunds" and crap.  And while all the bellyaching and naval-gazing and hating gays and hating people who hate gays and hating people who could care less about gays but don't want the federal government telling states what kind of marriage licenses to write was going on We let an opportunity to repeal one of the worst assaults on the bill of rights in our generation slip through our fingers!

You know, when Wikipedia didn't want SOPA to pass they made it so that you couldn't even sign onto their sight.  Wikipedia was "blacked out" except for the "Please call congress" page.  Google and Facebook took less drastic, but similar moves.  If we are going to win this fight we've got to get *serious*!  We have to focus on what's important.  We have to find the fights we can possible win *and fight them*!  Come on people!  Think!

----------


## jmdrake

> And that is why it lost.  I understand his reasoning, but if all we could obtain right now is get Americans' rights restored, I would have taken that and then tried to get the other in another amendment.


It lost because we didn't put enough pressure (any pressure?) on congress.  Most people who called in and jammed the congressional hotline to complain about SOPA had *no clue* what SOPA was even about.  They just knew that Google, Facebook and Wikipedia told them they should be against it.  We should have had a full court press grassroots effort calling congress ourselves and getting everyone we could to call.  They didn't have to know the exact language.  They didn't even need to read it.  We dropped the ball.  And I'm saying *we*.  I'm just as guilty as anyone else.  I *meant* to call into a talk radio show and stump for it.  I *meant* to, but I didn't.  Oh sure, the host supported the NDAA.  But last time most callers called in against it.  Those of the folks I needed to reach.  I dropped the ball.  We need to take steps to make sure no more balls get dropped.  We have banners for moneybombs and "call for Paul"?  How about a banner on the top piece of legislation to call in and support / oppose each week?  We've got to do better.  I'm mad as hell at myself.

----------


## tsai3904

Edit:  Nevermind...

----------


## Brett85

I called my rep Huelskamp and told him to vote for the amendment, and he actually voted for the amendment and against the GOP alternative amendment.  He might have voted for it anyway, but I'd like to think that my call and others who called had something to do with it.

----------


## jmdrake

> Thankfully my Congressman, John Duncan (TN), usually votes in line with Justin Amash and Ron Paul. Congressman Duncan is a co-sponsor of the Smith-Amash amendment and was recently awarded by the National Taxpayers Union the Taxpayer's Best Friend (Ron Paul used to be #1) - voting most in line with reducing spending and cutting taxes for 2011. It is pretty good to not have to complain all the time to my Congressman!


John Duncan rocks.  I wish he'd run for senate.

----------


## jmdrake

> I called my rep Huelskamp and told him to vote for the amendment, and he actually voted for the amendment and against the GOP alternative amendment.  He might have voted for it anyway, but I'd like to think that my call and others who called had something to do with it.


Good for you!

----------


## tsai3904

> If we are going to win this fight we've got to get *serious*!  We have to focus on what's important.  We have to find the fights we can possible win *and fight them*!  Come on people!  Think!


Agreed.  Elections are not the only way to exert influence.  We can pressure current members of Congress like what the internet companies did on SOPA.  Unfortunately, we did not apply enough pressure on this issue.  There were way more posts in the moneybomb thread than the Smith-Amash amendment thread.  Ron Paul has made the indefinite detention issue one of his top priorities as he has mentioned it in every one of his college campus rallies and yet we got barely 20 people to say they called or emailed their Congressman.

----------


## Lishy

I think McCain is still suffering from PTSD. He's so paranoid, he thinks we need martial law to keep us safe when terrorism is at an all-time low in the United States! 

This is what war does to people! He's $#@!ed up in the head, man! Seriously! This is what war does to people, and why we should pull out of Afghanistan!

----------


## sailingaway

Justin Amash ‏@repjustinamash
Roll call for Smith-Amash Amendment: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll270.xml Roll call for final passage of...

----------


## jmdrake

> Agreed.  Elections are not the only way to exert influence.  We can pressure current members of Congress like what the internet companies did on SOPA.  Unfortunately, we did not apply enough pressure on this issue.  There were way more posts in the moneybomb thread than the Smith-Amash amendment thread.  Ron Paul has made the indefinite detention issue one of his top priorities as he has mentioned it in every one of his college campus rallies and yet we got barely 20 people to say they called or emailed their Congressman.


I hear ya!  I don't mind the moneybomb threads.  At least that's doing *something*.  It's the "wedge issue" threads that became such a priority that I'm kicking myself over.  Yeah, I know I've participated in them.  That's why I'm kicking *myself*.  Still, you make a good point about the moneybombs and other stuff.  Calling your congressman is so freaking *easy*.  It's not like phone from home where you don't know who you're going to get.  They *have* to take the call.  We've got to make these efforts more of a priority.

----------


## tsai3904

Video of full debate on the amendment:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/H...389/stop/44272

----------


## jmdrake

Oh my goodness!  My worthless congressman Jim Cooper actually did the right thing and voted yes for this!  On the flipside teocon "darling" Michelle Blackburn (also of TN) voted no.  Same for the other worthless teocon Dianne Black.

----------


## sparebulb

> I think McCain is still suffering from PTSD.


Post Tramatic *Snitch* Disorder

McCain was given special perks while in custody, including a wet nurse.  He was even slated to be released with a group of fellow snitches and collaborators until he was _ordered_ by his CO not to go.

His pow experience gave him the perfect skill set to "serve" in congress.

----------


## oddtodd

> Oh my goodness!  My worthless congressman Jim Cooper actually did the right thing and voted yes for this!  On the flipside teocon "darling" Michelle Blackburn (also of TN) voted no.  Same for the other worthless teocon Dianne Black.


Add Renee Ellmers (NC) to that list. Her voting record indicates to me she must get a lot of money from those that profit from war and "defense".

----------


## Lucille

My rep. (Gosar) abstained on the Smith-Amash amendment, then voted YAY! on the NDAA, and with that he lost my vote.  (Not that I'll vote the one-termer also-ran loser Kirkpatrick, because she would have voted YAY! also.)  It's strange, since he voted Nay on the thing the first time around.  I contacted his office the other day and thanked him for voting nay previously, and asked that he support the amendment and vote Nay again on the NDAA.  I wonder why he changed his mind.

Flake voted Nay on the S-A amendment too.  And he wants to be elected to the US Senate.

----------


## D.A.S.

> Oh my goodness!  My worthless congressman Jim Cooper actually did the right thing and voted yes for this!  On the flipside teocon "darling" Michelle Blackburn (also of TN) voted no.  Same for the other worthless teocon Dianne Black.


Bachmann is another "no" -- big surprise.

Republican party, I weep for thee...  What a disgrace.

----------


## LibertyEagle

My POS congressman voted against it too.

----------


## Havax

Treason.

----------


## Melissa

Gosh I have alot of work still to do as all of our republicans in Indiana voted against this amendment

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

Anyone still want to tout Connie Mack around here?

If you do, get lost.

----------


## surf

roll call anyone?

----------


## Hyperion

> Oh my goodness!  My worthless congressman Jim Cooper actually did the right thing and voted yes for this!  On the flipside teocon "darling" Michelle Blackburn (also of TN) voted no.  Same for the other worthless teocon Dianne Black.


ha, Cooper is my worthless representative as well. Mr. Drake, you should run for the 5th. I know I'd volunteer.

----------


## tsai3904

> roll call anyone?


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...mash-Amendment

----------


## Lishy

> Post Tramatic *Snitch* Disorder
> 
> McCain was given special perks while in custody, including a wet nurse.  He was even slated to be released with a group of fellow snitches and collaborators until he was _ordered_ by his CO not to go.
> 
> His pow experience gave him the perfect skill set to "serve" in congress.


Nah, I'm pretty sure McCain is $#@!ed up in the head because of Vietnam. Look at how paranoid he is! He thought the way to peace in Libya is MORE violence!

This is what war does to people! You get $#@!ed up in the head!

----------


## John F Kennedy III

My rep, Dennis Cardoza (CA-18) didn't vote. I'm so glad this guy is retiring. Just hoping there is a good candidate to replace him with.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Ah hell!  I'm pissed!   You know why I'm pissed?  *Because we had no organized effort to fight for this amendment!*  Just a couple of thread with only a handful of posts!  When I saw this yesterday I didn't get a chance to do anything because I was tied up all day and figured I'd missed the boat.  At least I made sure to donate to the campaign.  Then I saw this today, saw I had one more chance and made the call.  But I realize it's now too little two late.  We had a freaking week of endless threads over Rand's "gayer" remark followed by another week of people parsing, crying and moaning over ever stinking email that came out of the campaign.  "Did Paul really write this?"  *Of course he did!*  "Did the CIA get to Paul"?  *Of course they did NOT!  And if they did it wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference!*  The campaign just told us what we already knew.  Actually capturing the nomination is beyond a long shot.  Throwing good money after bad in statewide TV ads in remaining primaries is a dumb idea.  It's best to keep trying to get as many delegates as possible and see what we can do with that.  That should have been the end of it.  But *nooooooo*.  We've got folks running around wanting "refunds" and crap.  And while all the bellyaching and naval-gazing and hating gays and hating people who hate gays and hating people who could care less about gays but don't want the federal government telling states what kind of marriage licenses to write was going on We let an opportunity to repeal one of the worst assaults on the bill of rights in our generation slip through our fingers!
> 
> You know, when Wikipedia didn't want SOPA to pass they made it so that you couldn't even sign onto their sight.  Wikipedia was "blacked out" except for the "Please call congress" page.  Google and Facebook took less drastic, but similar moves.  If we are going to win this fight we've got to get *serious*!  We have to focus on what's important.  We have to find the fights we can possible win *and fight them*!  Come on people!  Think!


I nominate this for the best post of the month.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> Ah hell!  I'm pissed!   You know why I'm pissed?  *Because we had no organized effort to fight for this amendment!*  Just a couple of thread with only a handful of posts!  When I saw this yesterday I didn't get a chance to do anything because I was tied up all day and figured I'd missed the boat.  At least I made sure to donate to the campaign.  Then I saw this today, saw I had one more chance and made the call.  But I realize it's now too little two late.  We had a freaking week of endless threads over Rand's "gayer" remark followed by another week of people parsing, crying and moaning over ever stinking email that came out of the campaign.  "Did Paul really write this?"  *Of course he did!*  "Did the CIA get to Paul"?  *Of course they did NOT!  And if they did it wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference!*  The campaign just told us what we already knew.  Actually capturing the nomination is beyond a long shot.  Throwing good money after bad in statewide TV ads in remaining primaries is a dumb idea.  It's best to keep trying to get as many delegates as possible and see what we can do with that.  That should have been the end of it.  But *nooooooo*.  We've got folks running around wanting "refunds" and crap.  And while all the bellyaching and naval-gazing and hating gays and hating people who hate gays and hating people who could care less about gays but don't want the federal government telling states what kind of marriage licenses to write was going on We let an opportunity to repeal one of the worst assaults on the bill of rights in our generation slip through our fingers!
> 
> You know, when Wikipedia didn't want SOPA to pass they made it so that you couldn't even sign onto their sight.  Wikipedia was "blacked out" except for the "Please call congress" page.  Google and Facebook took less drastic, but similar moves.  If we are going to win this fight we've got to get *serious*!  We have to focus on what's important.  We have to find the fights we can possible win *and fight them*!  Come on people!  Think!


At some point, telling people to forgo their lives and put everything down to fight whatever it is the government is doing to us that week is counterproductive.

I think it's time we start focusing our anger at the government itself as an immoral institution, rather than continuously fighting (and losing) the processes the government carries out.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Guinta and Bass both voted against.

NH's federal representation sux.

----------


## libertygrl

Congress still okay with indefinite detention and torture of Americans

May 18, 2012

Even after a federal court deemed the NDAA unconstitutional, the US House of Representatives refused to exclude indefinite detention provisions from the infamous defense spending bill during a vote on Friday.

An attempt to strike down any provisions allowing for the US military to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge from next years National Defense Authorization Act was shot down Friday morning in the House of Representatives.

Following discussions on an amendment to the 2013 NDAA that was proposed by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Washington) and Rep. Justin Amash (R-Michigan), House lawmakers opted against passing the law by a vote of 182-238. Had the Smish-Amash amendment passed, military detention for terror suspects captured in the US would have been excluded in the annual defense spending bill. Provisions that allows for that power, Sections 1021 and 1022, were inserted into the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2012. President Barack Obama signed that legislation on New Years Eve, essentially authorizing the US Armed Forces to detain Americans indefinitely at military facilities over only allegation of ties with terrorists and subject them to enhanced interrogation tactics on par with torture.

On Thursday night, Rep. Amash took to his Facebook page to address the amendment with his followers. No matter how much I am slandered or my positions are demagogued, I will NEVER stop fighting to defend your liberty and the Constitution, wrote the congressman.

Back on Capitol Hill, Rep. Amash circulated a document to his fellow lawmakers on Thursday outlining his proposed amendment. In urging his colleagues to vote yes on the Smith-Amash amendment, the representative from Michigan explained to Congress that the proposal would offer protection to non-citizens of the United States and is the only amendment up for discussion that would guarantee Americans a charge and trial.

Elsewhere in the paper, Rep. Amash harped on a decision out of a federal court earlier this week that ruled that the NDAA violated the US Constitution.
Our constituents demand that we protect their right to a charge and a trial  especially after the NDAA was ruled unconstitutional this week, wrote Rep. Amash.

That decision came Wednesday when United States District Judge Katherine Forrest shunned the NDAAs indefinite detention provision, saying it had a chilling impact on First Amendment rights.

An individual could run the risk of substantially supporting or directly supporting an associated force without even being aware that he or she was doing so, wrote Judge Forrest, who then cited complaints for American journalists who were concerned that theyd be imprisoned without charge solely for speaking with alleged terrorists.

Attorney Carl Mayer represented the plaintiffs in this case and spoke with RT after Judge Forrests decision. Mr. Mayer revealed that while the Obama administration can  and most likely will  file an appeal, we are suggesting that it may not be in their best interest because there are so many people from all sides of the political spectrum opposed to this law.

Although that opposition has indeed been widespread since even before this years NDAA was signed by President Obama on December 31, it was absent on Capitol Hill this Friday when the Smith-Amash amendment was shot down.
Moments before the amendment went up for vote, Rep. Amash wrote on Facebook, We know the NDAAs detention provision is unconstitutional. The House will vote on one substantive solution.

Will we fix it? And if we dont, how will we explain that to our constituents?

http://www.infowars.com/congress-sti...-of-americans/

----------


## JJ2

> My rep. (Gosar) abstained on the Smith-Amash amendment, then voted YAY! on the NDAA, and with that he lost my vote.  (Not that I'll vote the one-termer also-ran loser Kirkpatrick, because she would have voted YAY! also.)  It's strange, since he voted Nay on the thing the first time around.  I contacted his office the other day and thanked him for voting nay previously, and asked that he support the amendment and vote Nay again on the NDAA.  I wonder why he changed his mind.
> 
> Flake voted Nay on the S-A amendment too.  And he wants to be elected to the US Senate.


Yes, this is stunning. Gosar is my Representative that I was talking about in my previous post on this thread. The OP lists Gosar as a co-sponsor of the Smith-Amash Amendment!!! And then not only did he abstain from voting on it, but he voted yes on the NDAA?! I told him in my email that if he voted for the Smith-Amash Amendment I promised I would vote to re-elect him in November. Don't have to worry about that now, I guess.

Incredible.

----------


## tsai3904

> Yes, this is stunning. Gosar is my Representative that I was talking about in my previous post on this thread. The OP lists Gosar as a co-sponsor of the Smith-Amash Amendment!!! And then not only did he abstain from voting on it, but he voted yes on the NDAA?! I told him in my email that if he voted for the Smith-Amash Amendment I promised I would vote to re-elect him in November. Don't have to worry about that now, I guess.
> 
> Incredible.


He's listed as a cosponsor here (click on Amendments tab and search for "151"):
http://www.rules.house.gov/Legislati...spx?NewsID=828

Justin Amash also lists him as a cosponsor at the top of this letter:
http://amash.house.gov/sites/amash.h...ct%20Sheet.pdf

Someone must have gotten to him at the last minute.

----------


## shane77m

All I can say is that it is time to clean house. Unfortunately too many people are too stupid to care. So many enemies to the Constitution in our government.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Compliance through exhaustion.

And if we had managed to pass this amendment, it would have been repealed in a "tack on" amendment to some obscure omnibus spending bill six months from now.

Not to be too overly cynical or defeatist here, but we have got to face the facts:

The political process is, for all intents and purposes, closed.





> Ah hell!  I'm pissed!   You know why I'm pissed?  *Because we had no organized effort to fight for this amendment!*  Just a couple of thread with only a handful of posts!  When I saw this yesterday I didn't get a chance to do anything because I was tied up all day and figured I'd missed the boat.  At least I made sure to donate to the campaign.  Then I saw this today, saw I had one more chance and made the call.  But I realize it's now too little two late.  We had a freaking week of endless threads over Rand's "gayer" remark followed by another week of people parsing, crying and moaning over ever stinking email that came out of the campaign.  "Did Paul really write this?"  *Of course he did!*  "Did the CIA get to Paul"?  *Of course they did NOT!  And if they did it wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference!*  The campaign just told us what we already knew.  Actually capturing the nomination is beyond a long shot.  Throwing good money after bad in statewide TV ads in remaining primaries is a dumb idea.  It's best to keep trying to get as many delegates as possible and see what we can do with that.  That should have been the end of it.  But *nooooooo*.  We've got folks running around wanting "refunds" and crap.  And while all the bellyaching and naval-gazing and hating gays and hating people who hate gays and hating people who could care less about gays but don't want the federal government telling states what kind of marriage licenses to write was going on We let an opportunity to repeal one of the worst assaults on the bill of rights in our generation slip through our fingers!
> 
> You know, when Wikipedia didn't want SOPA to pass they made it so that you couldn't even sign onto their sight.  Wikipedia was "blacked out" except for the "Please call congress" page.  Google and Facebook took less drastic, but similar moves.  If we are going to win this fight we've got to get *serious*!  We have to focus on what's important.  We have to find the fights we can possible win *and fight them*!  Come on people!  Think!

----------


## GunnyFreedom

Thank you for the roll call on the amendment.  As far as I am concerned, all those who voted "No" on this amendment are guilty of high treason and should be tried in a court of law and sentenced appropriately.

----------


## lib3rtarian

> Thank you for the roll call on the amendment.  As far as I am concerned, all those who voted "No" on this amendment are guilty of high treason and should be tried in a court of law and sentenced appropriately.


Brad Miller voted yes, which is a relief. He had also voted against the original NDAA. Looks like at least he is good in civil liberties.

----------


## Lishy

I wonder WTF is going on in their minds... Like, what do they actually think? It's not rational what most these politicians do, and what they say...

I want to hear, one reason, ONE REASON, why this bill is $#@!ing necessary in the first place when terrorism is at an all-time LOW!

----------


## seyferjm

What ever would we do without great Tea Party Constitutuionalists like Bachmann and West?

----------


## Lishy

> What ever would we do without great Tea Party Constitutuionalists like Bachmann and West?


What if they answer a single damn, relevant question, WITHOUT changing subject? V_V

----------


## GunnyFreedom

Stuart Rhodes is coming to Raleigh! Wednesday the 30th of May, 2012.

We are holding an educational meeting at 4PM on May 30th in the NCGA for the State Legislators to learn about Agenda 21 and the NDAA. Stuart Rhodes, founder of Oathkeepers will be there to present about 10-15 minutes on the NDAA.

----------


## AGRP

Im curious why they didn't name the amendment something like the _American Freedom Act_.

----------

