Guest Post: Congress Proposes Bill to Allow Worldwide War … Including INSIDE the U.S.

[abelenkpe]

Guest Post: Congress Proposes Bill to Allow Worldwide War … Including INSIDE the U.S.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/05/guest-post-congress-proposes-bill-to-allow-worldwide-war-including-inside-the-u-s.html

Americans who have been paying attention are outraged that Bush lied us into Iraq by making up false claims about weapons of mass destruction and pretending that Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11.

Many are disgusted that Obama got us into a war in Libya without Congressional authorization.

But as the ACLU noted yesterday, Congress is going even further … proposing handing permanent, world-wide war-making powers to the president – including the ability to make war within the United States:

A hugely important provision for Congress to authorize a new worldwide war has been tucked away inside the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The bill was marked up by members of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) last Wednesday that poured into Thursday morning (2:45 a.m. to be exact).

A couple of minutes past midnight, Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.) offered an amendment to strike Sec. 1034 — the new authorization for worldwide war provision — from the NDAA. Visibly angry that such a large sweeping provision had not yet had any public hearing whatsoever, he vigorously characterized it as a very broad declaration of war.

Rep. Garamendi was very concerned by the limitless geographic boundaries of the provision. Essentially, it would enable the U.S. to use military force anywhere in the world (including within the U.S.) in search of terrorists.

(more at link)

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

Whaaat? Is this real?

[EC]

1. Not sourced.

Since the House is repub majority...I'd think this is bullshit.


There is NO WAY repubs would give a Democratic President complete power of anything, much less war.

[abelenkpe]

2. Yeah I can't see the house giving such powers to the president either

Think the blog is talking about this:

http://www.aclu.org/new-authorization-worldwide-war-without-end

Congress may soon vote on a new declaration of worldwide war without end, and without clear enemies. A “sleeper provision” deep inside defense bills pending before Congress could become the single biggest hand-over of unchecked war authority from Congress to the executive branch in modern American history.

President Obama has not sought new war authority. In fact, his administration has made clear that it believes it already has all of the authority that it needs to fight terrorism.

But Congress is considering monumental new legislation that would grant the president – and all presidents after him – sweeping new power to make war almost anywhere and everywhere. Unlike previous grants of authority for the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the proposed legislation would allow a president to use military force wherever terrorism suspects are present in the world, regardless of whether there has been any harm to U.S. citizens, or any attack on the United States, or any imminent threat of an attack. The legislation is broad enough to permit a president to use military force within the United States and against American citizens. The legislation contains no expiration date, and no criteria to determine when a president’s authority to use military force would end.

(more at link)

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

Says this was first proposed under last admin, that Obama isn't really seeking such powers.

[TheKentuckian]

3. He should not only not seek it but advise Congress that any such legislation will be vetoed

and if the veto is overridden, that the law would be "creatively" enforced.

Enough is Efuckingnough!

[Snoutport]

4. but they know that eventually a republican will hold the office again...

[JackRiddler]

7. What does that mean? Of course it's sourced.

Would you like it in the New York Times?

Is the ACLU not a source to you, do you think they make things up?

Is Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), who objected to the provision, an Internet rumor?

This has been covered on a variety of alternative media, and not at all on the mainstream media. Is it real yet?

Do you think denial can make this disappear? Don't look!

[Aerows]

5. Dear God

There is no WAY any president should have that power, and Congress shouldn't have the power to grant such power - particularly to wage war in the US against US citizens. It's bad enough with the current terrorism powers they have and the powers being wielded in the War on Drugs.

This would in NO WAY stop with terrorists. Hell, they might as well already declare the Constitution dead, this would pretty much turn us into a Totalitarian state.

[JackRiddler]

6. oof. K&R