Monday, December 5, 2011

Terror Detainee and Defense Program Policies C-Span

Various Senators spoke on an amendment offered by Senator Mark Udall (D-CO) to S. 1867, a bill dealing with Defense programs and policy, including terror detainee policy. Senator Udall’s amendment would have stricken language from the bill allowing for indefinite detention of some terrorism suspects. The amendment failed by a vote of 37-61.


Full Text of the Udall Detainee Amendment
Senate Amendment #1107. Mr. UDALL of Colorado submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1867, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; as follows:
Strike subtitle D of title X and insert the following:
Subtitle D–Detainee Matters
SEC. 1031. REVIEW OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
(a) In General.–Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with appropriate officials in the Executive Office of the President, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Attorney General, submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report setting forth the following:



S.1867

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Engrossed in Senate [Passed Senate] – ES)



SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.


    (a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-

      (1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

      (2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined–

        (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and

        (B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

        (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the
      disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.

      (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

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

            (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- 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.
      (section 1031 wasn’t there or I would have posted that too)
I stand by what I said in the post I did about C-Span and our elected officials once again.  As important as this bill is to The Citizens of the United States of America.  Once again it doesn’t seem like there are that many elected officials present.  I wonder how many voted without reading this bill?  shera~

No comments: