Senator Rubio Explains His Position on SB 1867
November 30, 2011 by Laurie Newsom
Filed under Defense, Hot Topics
Senator Rubio’s Statement for the Congressional Record
Mr. President, some people are wrongly suggesting that the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 this legislation will allow the military to capture and indefinitely detain any American citizen, and that the US Armed Forces would be able to perform law enforcement functions on American soil because of the authority conferred under Sections 1031 and 1032 of the Act. Several people have asked about my votes on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. In particular, some people are wrongly suggesting that this legislation will allow the military to capture and indefinitely detain any American citizen, and that the US Armed Forces would be able to perform law enforcement functions on American soil because of the authority conferred under Sections 1031 and 1032 of the Act. While I do have other serious concerns with this legislation, those particular assertions could not be further from the truth. I want to take this time to explain what the law actually does, what my position is on these issues, and why I joined with Senators DeMint, Coburn and Lee to vote for those specific sections, but against cloture on the final bill. Section 1031 of this act merely affirms the authority that the president already has to detain certain people pursuant to the current Authorization for Use of Military Force; in fact, this same section of the bill specifically states that nothing stated in Section 1031 is intended to expand the president’s power. In addition, this section sets specific limits on who can be detained under this act to only those people who planned or helped carry out the 9/11 attacks on the United States or people who are a member of, or substantially support, Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or their respective affiliates. There is no language that could possibly be construed as repealing the Posse Comitatus Act and allowing the US military to supplant your local police department in carrying out typical law enforcement activities. In particular, some folks are concerned about the language in Section 1031 that says that this includes “any person committing a belligerent act or directly supported such hostilities of such enemy forces.” This language clearly and unequivocally refers back to Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or its affiliates. Thus, not only would any person in question need to be involved with Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or its surrogates, but that person must also engage in a deliberate and substantial act that directly supports their efforts against us in the war on terror in order to be detained under this provision. There is nothing in this bill that could be construed in any way that would allow any branch of the military to detain a law-abiding American citizen if you go to the local gun store or grocery store. What this section of the bill does is help provide for our national security by giving clarity to the military in regard to its authority to detain people who have committed substantially harmful acts against the United States. This is extremely important given that there are Al-Qaeda cells currently operating within our borders. I would not leave the risk of a terrorist attack that could claim the life of a member of my family up to chance, and I will not leave that risk for your family either. Section 1032 of this bill concerns a smaller group of people who Congress feels are required to be detained by the US military because people who fit within this criteria are a more serious threat to our national security. Any person detained under Section 1032 must be a member of, or part of, Al-Qaeda or its associates AND they must have participated in the planning or execution of an attack against the US or our coalition partners. Simply put, the application of this detention requirement is limited to Al-Qaeda members that have tried to attack the US or its allies. However, this detention requirement is clearly limited by a clause that states that the requirement to detain does not extend to US citizens or lawful permanent residents. Together, these two sections do the following: they affirm the authority of the executive branch to act within our national interest and they provide the federal government with the tools that are needed to maintain our national security. This bill does NOT overturn the Posse Comitatus Act; the military will not be patrolling the streets. This bill does not take away your rights as a citizen or lawful permanent resident; the authority under this act does not take away one’s habeas rights. These sections do NOT take away an individual’s rights to equal protection under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, nor do they take away one’s due process rights afforded under the 5th or 14th. If this bill did such a thing, I would strongly oppose it. I want to thank everyone for reaching out to the office to voice your concerns on this bill. I want to assure you that I always have, and always will, listen to your concerns and address them in a timely fashion. I know this bill is not perfect; in fact, I proposed 2 Amendments to prevent the President from transferring foreign terrorists to the US to be prosecuted in the federal court system, and I joined with Senators DeMint, Coburn, and Lee to vote against cloture. However, in regard to the assertions that this bill allows the US military to supplant our local police departments or that it allows the federal government to detain otherwise law abiding citizens for simply carrying on in their daily lives, those assertions are entirely unfounded. As always, if you have any other questions, please feel free to contact me.
why is he not running for president of the united states
OK, I read it, and whoever posted the speech here needs to understand the concept of PARAGRAPHS, which would have made it much easier to read. Now, on to the issue. My biggest concern is just WHO would determine if a person were “involved in the “Taliban, Al-Qaeda or its associates”? I’ll tell you who: someone representing the federal government. If they’re mistaken (which they NEVER admit), they can just “disappear you” or let you go, AFTER you’ve been detained for months or years, without a trial or hearing. Think such a thing doesn’t happen? Just how naive’ are you? Parts of this bill will only make such travesties more legal. As for Rubio running for president, don’t worry, he will. A pretty boy AND a Republican? That’s the GOP’s wet dream come true! Finally, a conservative Jack Kennedy! Woo Hoo! When will Americans stop being so shallow? We need STATESMEN, not pretty boys who can speak well. Wasn’t that what Obama was? How soon you forget.
I guess someone did not like the comment that I made earlier and decided not to approve it. Perhaps too much information, a truth that hurts or fear of displaying the links that I had posted on two real and existing organization that pose a threat to the American people (Xe previously Blackwater and the Fusion Centers). Both have links by Wikipedia with information, their history and what they do. Below there is a paragraph from an article which link I have inserted. We should be making stance and be on the side of the people and not on the side of Washington sold out politicians as the one spoken of here.
“Let’s be clear. There is a threat, not against America but against our politicians. The threat is that if they don’t bow down to special interests by protecting Wall Street from “Occupy” or by attacking Iran though “proof” of Iran’s weapons programs has again been “debunked,” a flood of what used to be illegal cash will go to their opponents.”
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/12/01/the-truth-about-the-national-defense-authorization-act/
I would like someone who believes that this National Defense Authorization Act is totally harmless to Americans explain what is the purpose for the content in the inserted link. If it is not designed to intern Americans in detention camps then how many thousands of foreign terrorist does the Army is anticipating in detaining in the US and why is there a need for the Army to have this program to such scale.
http://www.goarmy.com/careers-and-jobs/browse-career-and-job-categories/legal-and-law-enforcement/internment-resettlement-specialist.html
Why should we trust that our government acts in our best interest. Did they do such with the economy? While we trusted them that they were doing the work they were hired to do they were allowing massive corruption and the looting of our nation and our citizens. They are not done yet but soon will be as all we have left is debt. One would have to be drugged, insane or living in oblivion to still trust them. I have come to the conclusion that it is a waste of time paying attention to a politician’s spoken words, or the media for that matter, instead I read and research to find what they are up to and not telling me.
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/14-homeland-security-contracts-kbr-to-build-detention-centers-in-the-us/
So here we have it all put together. They build the facilities, train the personel and pass the law which will permit it.
Hello,
My concern is that the wording on this states that the REQUIREMENT (being affiliated w/ Al-Qaeda etc) DOES NOT EXTEND to American citizens. This is very tricky wording and can be deceptive if not read properly. So the requirement for detention (Al qaeda affiliation, terrorist activity etc) IS NOT NECESSARY, is not required, for American citizens to be detained in this manner!! I’m sorry, but with that kind of wording there is a clear reason why some people are very upset. Why in the world was this worded to say such a thing?
Thank you and respectfully submitted,
Joe
I’m a member of the US armed forces and this act concerns me greatly. All that is required is the mere accusation of terrorists activities (having more firearms than the average person, a sizable amount of ammo, going to the gun range, being a combat veteran with knowledge of tactical warfighting) and the US military can seize your property and detain you indefinitely without the protection of constitutional rights. It’s not just the bill that is scary, but people’s lack of interest. Apathy within our society is what is going to make it easier to be slaves to the power. I will tell you all, I love this country and it’s founding ideals of Liberty and Inalienable Rights. I would rather die a free man than to live as a slave. If and when I get the order to disarm and imprison my fellow citizens, that is the day that I and many of my military counterparts will become the teeth of the rebellion. We have sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and it’s citizens against enemies foreign and domestic. I Cannot and Will not follow such an unconstitutional order.
“why is he not running for president of the united states”
Because he is NOT a Natural Born Citizen. He IS a citizen, but he was not born to two parents who were citizens at the time he was born. See Minor v. Happersett, and Ex Parte (or “In Re”) Lockwood.
Rubio cannot ever run for POTUS or Veep.
That being said, do ANY of you trust the government to keep its word? Do any of you believe that the Justice system couldn’t just drag you into it if it decided you were a threat?
Right.
1031(b)(2):
“person who… supported al-Queda, the Taliban, or associated forces…including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities…“
Note the word “OR”!! This Government no longer works for us, we are it’s pawns.
Guess marco forgot to read sections 1031 and 1032. but hey what the hell does he care he got the votes he needs for office and now he turns his coat against he very things he got elected to do. saddly the same as most of the so called tea party candidates elected last year….folks there are so many people / organisations from both sides of the isle saying that this is for americans its not funny. and yes the provisions actually state first that the military will have juristiction here at home and that they must arrest anyone deemed a terror suspect or supporter. now this comes with the same guidelines as the no fly lists, and includes folks who own guns, have more than two weeks of food, returning vets, christians, anyone who questions governement, protestors of any kind. are we seeing a pattern here? Rubio is a farce at best and a lier at worst.
You all give me so much hope! “We the People” are waking up!
Hi, this is a great post! Thanks..