This Is What “Indefinite Detention” Looks Like (Video)

By on December 10, 2011 in News 65

The military detention provisions are written in impenetrable legal and military jargon and incorporated into an obscure section of the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012″.

, , , ,

  • Andrew

    Apparently that video is from a G8 protest in Canada.

  • anonymouse

    Seriously, if you’re going to protest, bring a taser or some other form of non-lethal self defense apparatus in case the goons try and pull this shit. That way at least you’d have a fighting chance. United we stand, divided we get abducted by these brainwashed shitheads.

  • anonymouse

    Interesting. Do you know if it was before or after this new bill was passed?

  • Anonymous

    So these aren’t US troops. Not in America, maybe not a US citizen – and I thought a video showing indefinite detention would be longer that 34 sec.  There are more people being indefiniantly detained by their own fear than by S.1867.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, sure, see how that works out for you when all the other cops and soldiers start stomping you.

  • Camron Wiltshire

    I’m not sure where this video comes from.  I posted it as a visualization of the snatch and grab that is now legal thanks to the Senate and the Treasanous snakes McCain, Lieberman and Carl Levin.  All of which are beholden to AIPAC and apparently want America to operate just like Israel, The elite would be the chosen people and everyone else gets the palestinian treatment.  Anybody want to sniff around and find out the backstory on this?  

  • Camron Wiltshire

    “…and I thought a video showing indefinite detention would be longer than 34 sec.”  Yes your right, the video should be at least 10 years long!   Or wait a minute, indefinite means you don’t know how long because, you don’t get a lawyer, no right to a speedy trial and it applies everywhere because now the entire world is a battleground according to our sell out senators and government.   

  • Anonymous

    Do you know what happened to this individual?  I have a reasonable suspicion he is no longer being detained.  I understand and share the concerns about the direction America is headed.  I believe in preperation towards a better future.  However, there is a difference between disseminting accurate information and fear mongoring.  If the fear within you only amplifies the tyranny that is being manifested by government then you are a servant of that fear.  True, for some that may be the call of awakening, but for most it will either cause them to turn a blind eye to your message as deranged paranoia or cause undirected panic, niether of which serves a directed purpose. 

  • Anonymous

    Do you know what happened to this individual?  I have a reasonable suspicion he is no longer being detained.  I understand and share the concerns about the direction America is headed.  I believe in preperation towards a better future.  However, there is a difference between disseminting accurate information and fear mongoring.  If the fear within you only amplifies the tyranny that is being manifested by government then you are a servant of that fear.  True, for some that may be the call of awakening, but for most it will either cause them to turn a blind eye to your message as deranged paranoia or cause undirected panic, niether of which serves a directed purpose. 

  • DeepCough

    “Send lawyers, guns, and money/
    the shit has hit the fan.”

    ~Warren Zevon

  • DeepCough

    “Send lawyers, guns, and money/
    the shit has hit the fan.”

    ~Warren Zevon

  • Camron Wiltshire

    So now I’m “fear mongering”.  That’s hilarious.  Again I posted an article as an EXAMPLE of the powers that are now legally available in the United States to our Gov’t.  Believe it or not, most people in America have no Fucking clue this is the case.  Don’t believe me, next time you buy groceries, talk to every employee working there and take a poll. (I did and it wasn’t pretty)

      You on the other hand have posted comments which could be construed as “apathy mongering”.   “If the fear within you only amplifies the tyranny..” ok stop right there.  Did you just watch the Secret?  Are you going to tell me that the secret to abundance is to not focus on the “negative” now?  

    Seriously man your arguments are actually baseless.  No one is spreading fear. Unless you equate sharing information and examples of tactics liscensed for use against protest effectively nullifying constitutional law as “fear mongering”.  In that case what do you advise?   That we all do nothing and definitely don’t bring it up because somebody might get their feelings hurt??

    Again I provided an example of the powers the US government has just granted itself to wield over everyone in Battleground USA.  If you want to get busy attacking them for “fear mongering” please go right ahead.  I’m not afraid so I’m not “amplfying” the fear.  I’m sharing information.  How you REACT to it it is your choice and please try to understand there is a difference between the messenger and the message.   I can’t control what anyone who sees this will do, for you to assume so is to erect barriers to freedom of speech or of personal responsibility for fear of what someone may do with the info. Your ever so PC rhetoric reeks of new speak neutering to me.Yes it will hopefully be a “call of awakening” for some, for the folks who “turn a blind eye”, well they are the type of folks that would do that no matter what evidence you bring to them. Question is why are you sticking up for them?  They are the reason we are in this shit storm in the first place. 

    Yes they are out there, I know too many.  Sadly it’s only when enough people bring up these topics and they feel it’s “safe” or “cool” now to discuss openly then such types will happily jump on board.  

    “In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.”-Mark Twain

  • Tuna Ghost

    The snatch and grab of non-US citizens suspected of association with terrorist groups was already “legal”.  The white house wants to veto the bill because its largely redundant.  

  • Anonymous

    thank you, thank you for this

  • Anonymous

    I dont know, the white houses position actually seems to be that this ties their hands…mainly because this bill detains them under the law of war which is defined whereas the current practice is to detain them under voodoo funky magic laws that dont exist….courtesy of the war on terra

  • Monkey See Monkey Do

    I’d like to see more articles about how people are succeeding in changing the world for the better. Or at least strategies we can use to prevent and challenge whats happening in the world. Im not taking sides, I understand your just the messenger but do you also have solutions to offer? Im sure you do.

  • chubby

    bravo, like I once said and to which you replied, too much erudite bs trying to be the “voice of reason,” the time for that has passed, we need to get our asses in gear…

  • Anonymous

    We could all go hang out in a sweat lodge and play with juju beads.

  • Anonymous

    We could all go hang out in a sweat lodge and play with juju beads.

  • Simiantongue
  • Scottyj001

    ! me + 4 jackboots “just following orders =  4 widows + 1 angry ghost!

  • Scottyj001

    I’m wired for sound you silly fuckin’ puppies. Do You love it. We can have a fair fight in hell.  Until you figure out how to collect a more ethical paycheck, you’re fair game. Hey, it’s not personal, it’s business. I’m free and you’re bought and paid for!

  • Scottyj001

    I had relatives politely escorted to the gas chambers. Never again! It was only 65 years ago! This isn’t exactly ancient history! Try and take this Bear Jew w/o a fight. Have you ever heard of William Cooper! And if you’re actually receiving a government paycheck for reading this, the ruthless curse I put on you and your family should be setting in soon. I assure you, it’s nothing personal.

    Postscript: Nothing in these messages in any way resembles the truth. It is all bullshit devoid of any eloquence or gravity. If you devote any time to this, you are a mongoloid jackoff. My half-assed threats are worth less than Federal Reserve notes!
     

  • Monkey See Monkey Do

    lol

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Thank you everyone, I appreciate all of your feedback (Even Calypso :)  If anyone finds articles that are inspirational, empowering etc. by all means please send them to me (camronwiltshire[at]gmail[dot]com) as a potential story and I will gladly submit them and give you credit as the finder.   
     I will look for inspiring material that shows folks being the change they seek, case in point I ask that folks support or become part of local activist groups who are doing work that you admire.  It’s amazing what a small committed group of individuals can create by working together.  From there feel free to report back and let us know how your experiments in leadership, community building, etc pan out.  Also creating a dialog about what we all do to contribute allows space for everyone to learn from the experience of everyone else and avoid common pitfalls.Thanks again for your suggestion and for prompting this conversation.I would say also you may want to pick one or two issues which you are most passionate about, and then determine a strategy for attaining a quantifiable goal.  For example.  Say you want to Expose the FED.  I would learn everything you can about them from various perspectives, find out what has been done before to challenge them and what is currently in the works and then decide how you want to apply best your energy and leverage.  Whether your focus would be on spreading information via, radio call ins, writing blog posts, creating discussion groups on and offline, hosting film screenings, working with local representatives to affect legislation and create a   record of discussion and position with them on the reality of the power the Fed wields.  To creating indymedia viral videos, etc etc.  Or developing entirely new tactics and displaying them on a blog like this.  By any Memes necessary I guess sums up what I am trying to say.Thank you.

  • Camron Wiltshire

    You gonna join me? 

  • Camron Wiltshire

    We are talking about S.1867 within the above context.  I don’t think the White House is too keen on following the Constitution these days so I won’t hold my breath waiting for Obama to veto it.

  • Tuna Ghost

    Regardless of what they say, it wouldn’t be vetoed for its violation of constitutional rights (which don’t apply to non-citizens anyway), it would be vetoed for being unnecessary since there is already similar legislation on the books and, as Moral Drift points out, forces them into a framework that ties their hands more than they’d probably like.  

  • Anonymous

     As long as you don’t use limestone hot rocks – snap, crackle pop!  Hell, I build a pretty mean black willow lodge.

  • Anarchy Pony

    That’s when the level up to using lethal force.

  • NewHatLinux

    Maybe Alex Jones is not as crazy as we thought?

  • Camron Wiltshire

    I’ve never heard of a black willow lodge before.  I’m always up for a good sweat.  It’s good medicine :)

  • Camron Wiltshire

    I’m sorry but the semantics involved in the tangential discussion between you and Moral drift misses the point.  S. 1867 applies to American Citizens.   

  • Anonymous

    salix nigra

  • Tuna Ghost

    section 1032 subsection b1 and b2:

    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

    This, combined with precedent like Hamdi v Rumsfeld, would mean the detainees (american or otherwise) would still be entitled to due process.  

    The executive branch’s objections: 

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/112/saps1867s_20111117.pdf

    Note that the most serious objections are on the basis that it will make it more difficult for the US to “combat terrorism”.  

  • Anon

    So they prefer John Yoo’s “Imperial Presidency” interpretation, as outlined in an OLC memo from 27th June 2002..?

    The ACLU managed to get a hold of that one through their FOIA requests, and summarised it thusly:

    “Concludes that the “the President’s
    authority to detain enemy combatants, including U.S. citizens, is based on his constitutional authority as Commander in Chief ” and that the Non-Detention Act cannot interfere with that authority.
    The memo is criticized and partly repudiated in Steven Bradbury’s
    1/15/09 memo re status of certain OLC opinions.”

    The former memo is available at: http://www.justice.gov/olc/docs/memodetentionuscitizens06272002.pdf

    The latter can be found at: https://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc/olc011509.pdf

  • Anonymous

    Thank you, thank you for this.

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Looks good to me.  You anywhere near Ga/Bama?

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Looks good to me.  You anywhere near Ga/Bama?

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Thank you Anon.  Tuna refuses to parse data that doesn’t confirm his initial bias.  It’s the same with 9/11 sadly and yes Tuna we all know you have blind spots there.  You imagine Building 7 is no great crime or reason to reconsider the OCT is nothing but bullshit wrapped in urine soaked flag and set on fire by the neocons and other associated elements.  Surely you can understand how the administration would be able to release the dumbed down go back to sleep clause in any bill and then contradict themselves allowing loop holes as displayed by Anon above and many many more.  Why are you so willing to fall for these tricks then I ponder?  Why do you feel the need to attempt to shoot down anyone sharing a perspective that would elicit outcry and action?  curious, curious…

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Are Americans in Line for Gitmo?
    Though the 9/11 attacks occurred more than a decade ago, Congress continues to exploit them to pass evermore draconian laws on “terrorism,” with the Senate now empowering the military to arrest people on U.S. soil and hold them without trial, a serious threat to American liberties
    by Ray McGovern

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/04-0
    In support of the bill S. 1867 SEC. 1031, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread783266/pg1

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Are Americans in Line for Gitmo?
    Though the 9/11 attacks occurred more than a decade ago, Congress continues to exploit them to pass evermore draconian laws on “terrorism,” with the Senate now empowering the military to arrest people on U.S. soil and hold them without trial, a serious threat to American liberties
    by Ray McGovern

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/04-0
    In support of the bill S. 1867 SEC. 1031, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread783266/pg1

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Please read the above articles.  If you are saying that 27 year CIA Intelligence Analyst Ray McGovern is mistaken in his accounting of the situation than by all means please go point by point with citations from his article and present counter evidence.  Also Senator Graham states explicitly that 1031 does allow the detainment of even American’s as per the Jose Padilla case and is the “law of the land”. 

  • Camron Wiltshire

    Please read the above articles.  If you are saying that 27 year CIA Intelligence Analyst Ray McGovern is mistaken in his accounting of the situation than by all means please go point by point with citations from his article and present counter evidence.  Also Senator Graham states explicitly that 1031 does allow the detainment of even American’s as per the Jose Padilla case and is the “law of the land”. 

  • Camron Wiltshire

    “The Senate bill, in effect, revokes an 1878 law known as the Posse Comitatus Act, which banned the Army from domestic law enforcement after the military had been used —and often abused — in that role during Reconstruction. Ever since then, that law has been taken very seriously — until now. Military officers have had their careers brought to an abrupt halt by involving federal military assets in purely civilian criminal matters.”
    “Should you be tempted to dismiss this as “liberal fear-mongering,” take a look at this item from FoxNews.com with its gleeful headline: “Democrat-Controlled Senate Passes Constitution-Shredding Defense Authorization Bill”:
    “The bill would require military custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of Al Qaeda or its affiliates and involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. … The legislation also would give the government the authority to have the military hold an individual suspected of terrorism indefinitely, without a trial.
    “Since the bill puts military detention authority on steroids and makes it permanent, American citizens and others are at greater risk of being locked away by the military without charge or trial if this bill becomes law,’ said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.”
    A key element in the Senate bill, like the House version, is to expand the original Authorization of the Use of Military Force Act (AUMF) of September 2001 so it no longer links exclusively to 9/11. This creates the kind of ambiguity that allows Sens. John McCain, R-Arizona, and Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, to claim that the bill’s stringent provisions do apply to U.S. citizens, as well as non-citizens.
    In addition, the new wording adds “associated forces” (whatever that means) to the previous AUMF’s list of targets. The language of the AUMF of September 2001 was limited to “those nations, organizations, or persons he [the President] determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.”

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/04-0

  • Tuna Ghost

    Oh for fuck’s sake.  Have you ever heard of the fallacy of the excluded middle?  It’s an actual logical fallacy, and given the how keen you are to use the word “fallacy” inappropriately I’m going to go out on a limb and assume you’ve never heard of it.  You bringing up 9/11 is also committing several fallacies (association fallacy, appeal to emotions, etc.), but since you don’t seem to really understand the term I’m just going to stop there.

    Simply put: disagreeing with you does not mean I am in favor of this bill.  I am not in favor of this bill.  I also don’t think it will make it past the executive branch, or that it allows the snatch-and-grab scenario as you’ve described it.  If it does, then I’m going to start worrying, because it will mean the executive branch and various intelligence agencies are either completely powerless (unlikely) or completely insane (not as unlikely, but still probably not likely).    

    The heads of various intelligence organizations in the US are not in favor of this bill, and it is for the same reason the white house is not in favor of it.  It would make taking custody of terrorist suspects (no matter whom or where) too fucking visible.  It would involve more people than they want, and it would come with an associated paper trail that they most certainly want to avoid.

    Of course the government wants to limit your rights.  This should come as a surprise to no one.  This particular bill, however, aside from being largely redundant (the US already has these powers), actually makes the situation you’re so afraid of even more difficult to carry off cleanly.  Your inability to understand this comes as no surprise to me, given your general ignorance of how governments, particularly the US, operate in this regard.  

  • Eatadick

    Bring pepper spray and back up your fellows. In Australia, if a Crocodile grabs a Mate when we are fishing up North, everyone leaps on its back and the Mate lives to fish again.
    You Guys just stare and scream abuse. Get onto it, mass attack the Bastards, save the Person being abducted, push him to the rear.

  • Anonymous
  • Guest

     Fuckin a, everyone just wants to cry, whine, and complain when the gov. actually starts pushing them around instead of pushing back.. That crowd should have CRUSHED those military goons and police forces that illegally took that person into custody. It’s like they’re waiting for some superman to come down from the clouds and make everything right. Might Is Right, sorry to say,.. So step up to the plate and don’t let a bloody nose scare you, push those Pig Capitalists back n beat em down if they’re walkin on your rights.. Dumbshits ;P

  • Navysealteam7

    Man that Camron Wiltshire is a crackpot!!! Thanx for sharing the real info Tuna, your presence on here is appreciated, unlike some others…

  • Guest

    Y..?

  • Guest

    Y..?

  • Guest

    Plz shut up and get a life, only losers with nothing to do go on long, hidious rants about nothing and then try to call it sumthing. Anyone can pull info out there arse thanx to the internet and seem halfway right… Please just get a life and get off the computer and away from the counterculture reading for at least a night… Thank you :)

  • Navysealteam7

     Thank you Tuna, that damn Camron could use a good smack across the face for her to wake up to her poorly logical statements ;D

  • Anon

    fwiw, the charge of confirmation bias seems, to me at least, more applicable to your reaction than what I read from Tuna in this instance

    the real issue here is whether these extraordinary powers should be brought within the constitutional order (via enactment by the legislature), or whether they should be left in the undefined and  almost-beyond-regulation ambit of executive discretion – this is an argument which has been central to liberal political theory since Carl Schmitt defined as sovereign he who decides the exception

    contemporary legal scholars (David Dyzenhaus may be the leading example) have sought to reconcile the central concept of the rule of law with this category of powers which are without explicit basis or limit – Schmitt’s argument was that when push comes to shove _someone_ is making the decisions and that something about the nature of decision-making under these exceptional circumstances (such as an ‘existential threat to the life of the nation’) requires that it is exercised unilaterally so as to avoid the inefficiencies of debate and compromise

    Yoo’s position was that the executive is inherently empowered to do whatever is necessary to protect the nation, and because detention is a part of fighting wars, and because the president is commander in chief, congress is constitutionally incapable of legislating in the area – Congress’ decision to act must be seen, then, as an attempt to bring the subject matter within the field of democratic control rather than leave it to the executive to declare that it can do whatever it wants, and leave it to the supreme court to tell them after the fact whether it was OK or not (in circumstances where the tendency for judiciaries to ‘defer’ to the executive is massively amplified)

    short story – it’s a far more complicated issue than it might seem

  • Tuna Ghost

    The argument is not that it is taking away american liberties.  Those liberties are already gone; the argument is about who is reporting to who when these violations of liberties are committed.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    The argument is not that it is taking away american liberties.  Those liberties are already gone; the argument is about who is reporting to who when these violations of liberties are committed.  

  • Anon

    couldn’t resist refreshing my memory on Dyzenhaus’ work on this, and found a .doc link for an extremely worthwhile 2005 essay titled Schmitt v Dicey: Are States of Emergency Inside or Outside the Legal Order?

    ( http://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?hl=en&q=http://www.creum.umontreal.ca/IMG/doc/Schmitt_v_Dicey_1_.doc&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm018xRWjh7yMEZzWc7AJNEDcv8Etw&oi=scholarr )

    now it’d be wrong to imply that you will, as a direct result of having taken the time to get through it, be instantly more attractive to prospective sexual partners, however I can guarantee that whomsoever does take that time will have a great deal more insight into the unsatisfactory and unsettling nature of the answers provided over the last decade to age-old questions about liberty and the role of government in ensuring security

    see also:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/21/message-president-congress-regarding-continuation-national-emergency-res

  • Anonymous

    i am a son of the south and know well the hills and dales of appalachiastan

  • Camron Wiltshire

    @NavySeal an d Tuna.  Sorry No room to type, see on the flip side.  PS> Tuna, Since you hold your intelligence in such high regard, please explain Building 7′s immaculate collapse in terms of  structural engineering.  Go ahead I will wait.  And yes it i sa litmus test for truth, I’ve not forgotten our previous conversations.  

  • Camron Wiltshire

    @NavySeal an d Tuna.  Sorry No room to type, see on the flip side.  PS> Tuna, Since you hold your intelligence in such high regard, please explain Building 7′s immaculate collapse in terms of  structural engineering.  Go ahead I will wait.  And yes it i sa litmus test for truth, I’ve not forgotten our previous conversations.  

  • Camron Wiltshire

    @NavySeal an d Tuna.  Sorry No room to type, see on the flip side.  PS> Tuna, Since you hold your intelligence in such high regard, please explain Building 7′s immaculate collapse in terms of  structural engineering.  Go ahead I will wait.  And yes it i sa litmus test for truth, I’ve not forgotten our previous conversations.  

  • Simiantongue
  • http://bestchoicerecipes.com/ Felixneo81

    It looks violent to me….

  • Andrew

    Hey dumb shit. The whole point of this video is to show what is now LEGAL in the US. Despite how atrocious and unjust it is, its the law. I agree completely that people should stand up for their common rights as humans and I wouldn’t take the shit the police and military are doing in the US, but don’t try to say they are doing something illegal. Just shows your ignorance