w*********g
发帖数: 30882 | 1 没有明确界定的敌人。美国可以声明或宣称任何人为恐怖分子，或声称他们正在或曾
经支持对美国的“敌对行动”和攻击意向。
====================================================
美国开始纳粹化进程发表于：2011-12-09 03:02:33作者:孤岛居士发短信加好友更多作品
级别：六级士官积分：2329中高考复习，家长疯抢必考点 安溪铁观音-秋茶优惠中 中
国人就来支持国产战机！
记者陈薇报道，据香港《大公报》网站12月6日援引外电报道，绝大部分美国人
对《国防授权法案》获美国参院通过的新闻一无所知，因为美国主流媒体不约而同地对
此新闻选择沉默，就连平时热衷人权的美联社、《纽约时报》等也对《国防授权法案》
如何侵犯美国公民权利的事实只字不提。
报道称，美国只有少数非主流媒体如“Business Insider”、《连线》杂志和
《基督教科学箴言报》对法案提出了质疑，其他广播媒体则不愿意报道《国防授权法案
》。“Business Insider”一名编辑日前向三大有线新闻网络的督制和主播发电邮，希
望他们报道此事，但他们却没有任何人愿意挺身而出。
报道还称，目前，只有美国“时事电视”的主播凯特•奥尔贝曼和微软全
国广播公司的迪伦•拉蒂根正在跟进《国防授权法案》，但媒体对这件事的关注
程度还远远不足。
美国众议院军事委员会在昨天（2011-5-18）深夜通过国防授权法案(NDAA)，其
中包含了一个危险的条款，授权可以进行打击恐怖主义的全球战争。该法案还包括了一
个令人不安的修订，拖延了歧视性“不问不说”政策的废止执行。
战争授权条款是由委员会主席，共和党巴克麦克科恩(R - CA)增加到法案中的
，比当前的战争授权条款还多。而且永不过期——允许总统对任何有恐怖主义嫌疑的国
家使用军事力量，即使和9/11恐怖袭击没有联系，或没有其他特定损害、威胁到美国。
“大多数美国人希望看到限制美国参与国外冲突，众议院军事委员会却刚刚通
过了一项管理战争的空头支票”。劳拉瓦特墨菲，美国公民自由联盟华盛顿立法办公室
主任说。 “令人惊讶的是，该条款是利用一次避免引起注意和论争的零听证会通过的
，被藏在一个长达数百页的法案深处。新的全球战争授权将意味着暴力的增加，并将使
美国更加不安全。众议院应该在该条文还在辩论的时候，把它从国防法案中剔除出去。“
NDAA的“不问不说”修正案，扩大了废止该法律的认证要求，包括需要每个军
种的执行处处长确认。另一项修订将否决同性恋者服役人员根据他们的性倾向获得联邦
设施的平等机会。 “不问不说”政策的废止就在半年前国防部长和参谋长联席会议上
，得到了总统奥巴马的支持，当时两党多数还在领导参众两院。这项政策是在1993年通
过成为法律，按照该政策，自1994年以来，超过14,000服役人员因为他们的性倾向而被
排挤出来。
“拖延'不问不说'的废除是完全无理和不必要的，是继续实施歧视性政策”墨
菲说。“这些固执的修正案违背了我们的总统和军队最高层次的意志，更不用提数万名
在默默为我们国家服务的美国人们。我们敦促众议院从法案中剔除这些有害的修订。”
这项立法授权规定：
美国总统可以对任何国家，国内和国外的组织和人士采取单方面的军事行动，
对象为那些被认为是在目前或过去支持或从事对美国或其盟国采取任何敌对行为的国家
、组织和人士。
该立法取消了必须经过国会批准才能使用武力的要求，而是赋予总统极权独裁
的权力，可以在任何一个不确定的时间内采取任何军事行动。
它甚至赋予总统权力，可以不顾国会的监督，对美国国内的公民进行打击。这
一授权还规定，在未来无限期的时代中，美国总统有权决定：
无休止的战争。战争将继续下去，直到一切敌对行动被终止，永远不会发生。
无国界的战争。总统将有充分的权力发动对任何国家，组织或个人，包括对美
国本土的美国公民的军事打击。
单方面的军事行动。赋予总统充分的权力在任何时间，没有国会批准的情况下
攻击地球的任何国家。
没有明确界定的敌人。美国可以声明或宣称任何人为恐怖分子，或声称他们正
在或曾经支持对美国的“敌对行动”和攻击意向。
同时攻击几个国家。总统将有充分权力入侵伊朗、叙利亚、朝鲜，以及其他恐
怖主义或者支援恐怖主义的国家，包括俄罗斯和中国。根据该法例，所有这些国家都已
经“被发现”有支持和资助对美国的敌对行为。
（转MY网BBS ms666网友 | w*********g
发帖数: 30882 | | l*****o
发帖数: 9235 | 3 米国的所谓新闻自由根本就是个神话，还不如ＣＣＴＶ。 | l*x
发帖数: 891 | | I******a
发帖数: 3812 | 5 其实只要不煽动暴力教唆犯罪，他们要搞你也比较困难。
作品
【在 w*********g 的大作中提到】
| w**********2
发帖数: 764 | | s***q
发帖数: 10585 | 7 楼主的标题有相当大的问题
请不要侮辱“纳粹”这个词！！！！
作品
【在 w*********g 的大作中提到】
| r**m
发帖数: 2823 | | w*********g
发帖数: 30882 | | M*****8
发帖数: 17722 | 10
...........................
小破熊似乎已经倒戈加入油队了。
不过只会是被利用后照样被烹的命。
后清同样以为孝敬盗魔经的信徒能得保护，
其实在人家的教义里，异族都是畜牲该灭绝。
【在 s***q 的大作中提到】
: 楼主的标题有相当大的问题
: 请不要侮辱“纳粹”这个词！！！！
:
: 作品
| | | d**o
发帖数: 5158 | | R****a
发帖数: 6858 | 12
没有倒戈加入什么油队。
只不过看到美国这边已经做好战争准备了，中国那边还继续晕晕乎乎，北美的华人还继
续晕晕乎乎，感到着急。
过去这些年来，针对中东、拉美、北非国家的颜色革命基本上都是成功的，而且是按部就班进行的。这就说明所谓2012年要颠覆、攻打伊朗，否则可能爆发世界大战的说法，并非是空穴来风。
而全世界绝大多数中国人，似乎还把这件事情当做阴谋论，不屑一顾，至少我身边的人都是如此。
【在 M*****8 的大作中提到】
:
: ...........................
: 小破熊似乎已经倒戈加入油队了。
: 不过只会是被利用后照样被烹的命。
: 后清同样以为孝敬盗魔经的信徒能得保护，
: 其实在人家的教义里，异族都是畜牲该灭绝。
| g*****c
发帖数: 4378 | 13 naive
【在 I******a 的大作中提到】
: 其实只要不煽动暴力教唆犯罪，他们要搞你也比较困难。
:
: 作品
| M*****8
发帖数: 17722 | 14
部就班进行的。这就说明所谓2012年要颠覆、攻打伊朗，否则可能爆发世界大战的说法
，并非是空穴来风。
人都是如此。
............................
所以中国人的政治智商和他们的政治地位一样。
在世界各国都是倒数的第一第二，并且很满足。
不过说实在，民族性比个性还难改。羊就是羊。
【在 R****a 的大作中提到】
:
: 没有倒戈加入什么油队。
: 只不过看到美国这边已经做好战争准备了，中国那边还继续晕晕乎乎，北美的华人还继
: 续晕晕乎乎，感到着急。
: 过去这些年来，针对中东、拉美、北非国家的颜色革命基本上都是成功的，而且是按部就班进行的。这就说明所谓2012年要颠覆、攻打伊朗，否则可能爆发世界大战的说法，并非是空穴来风。
: 而全世界绝大多数中国人，似乎还把这件事情当做阴谋论，不屑一顾，至少我身边的人都是如此。
| l********k
发帖数: 14844 | 15 兔子和狗还是有先后下锅的区别的。
【在 M*****8 的大作中提到】
:
: 部就班进行的。这就说明所谓2012年要颠覆、攻打伊朗，否则可能爆发世界大战的说法
: ，并非是空穴来风。
: 人都是如此。
: ............................
: 所以中国人的政治智商和他们的政治地位一样。
: 在世界各国都是倒数的第一第二，并且很满足。
: 不过说实在，民族性比个性还难改。羊就是羊。
| m****n
发帖数: 75 | 16 daily show 上不是刚播过吗？老美不看？
作品
【在 w*********g 的大作中提到】
:
| w********t
发帖数: 12853 | 17 我本人反感和反对这个法案，确实是美国人权和自由的倒退。
但是你说主要媒体故意哑口， 不是事实，印象中媒体一直在讨论这个东西，我周围有
几个美国人就提起过。 这是 Yahoo 上的评论文章。
.....YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY1-0 of 0prev next ..Let your friends be your
guide to great content on Yahoo! News by connecting to Facebook. By
connecting you'll be able to see friends' Activity and add your own. Learn
more »
.
..What question do you want to ask the GOP candidates?• Submit one now
or tweet it using #NHdebate
• Watch the debate live on Y! News Jan. 7th....This story comes from
the Yahoo! Contributor Network, where individuals publish their unique
perspectives on some of the world’s most popular websites. Do you have a
story to tell? Become a Yahoo! contributor......Obama Signs Controversial
NDAA into Law
..By D. Benjamin Satkowiak
.PostsWebsite .By D. Benjamin Satkowiak | Yahoo! Contributor Network – Tue
, Jan 3, 2012....Email
Share4Print......
ANALYSIS | On Saturday, as many Americans were busy preparing themselves for
the ringing in of 2012, President Barack Obama was busy signing into law
the controversial National Defense Authorization Act. The bill, which was
debated with heated fervor, is considered by some, including members of
Congress, to be legislation that crosses the boundaries of the United States
' Constitution.
President Obama, himself, had originally threatened to veto the bill, if
language that would have precluded Americans from being subjected to
indefinite detention was not removed. The bill's co-sponsor, Michigan
Senator Carl Levin also stated that it was, in fact, the Obama
administration which demanded that language specifying U.S. citizens and
lawful resident aliens would be exempt from the indefinite detention
provision be removed.
The provision, though touted as a necessary inclusion to benefit the war on
terror, has come under immense scrutiny as its language sets the stage for
American citizens to be detained, arrested and potentially dealt with by use
of extreme prejudice, for the mere assertion the one may be involved in
potential terrorist activity. The potential, some fear, will do away with
the requirements of probable cause, Miranda rights and the right to a fair
trial.
In his signing statement, President Obama stated that despite having "
serious reservations," the bill was deemed too important not to sign into
law. Furthermore, administration officials stated publicly that the final
version of the bill was not consistent with the position of the White House.
According to Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, the
bill seals Obama's legacy as the president who legalized indefinite
detention without trial or cause. The ACLU also voices a similar opinion,
stating that the bill damages America's reputation for upholding the rule of
law."
What is left to be unfurled, by the American public, are the potential
future complications caused by such an open-ended piece of legislation.
While many view the world's current standing as removed from immediate
threat to Constitutional rights, the provision allows for a multitude of
interpretive change, as future administrations enter and leave political
power.
It is for these fears, alone, that many feel the disenfranchisement of
voters will escalate in response. | w********t
发帖数: 12853 | 18 我本人反感和反对这个法案，确实是美国人权和自由的倒退。
但是你说主要媒体故意哑口， 不是事实，印象中媒体一直在讨论这个东西，我周围有
几个美国人就提起过。
4 个小时之前， CNN 报道纽约中央火车站针对奥巴马签署这个法案的示威，多人被捕。 | w********t
发帖数: 12853 | 19 纽约时报几天前就报道，也没有对这个法案的反对声音“只字不提“。
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/us/politics/obama-signs-milit
HONOLULU — President Obama, after objecting to provisions of a military spending bill that would have forced him to try terrorism suspects in military courts and impose strict sanctions on Iran’s oil exports, signed the bill on Saturday.
Related
Obama to Turn Up Attacks on Congress in Campaign (January 1, 2012)
Election 2012 iPhone App
A one-stop destination for the latest political news — from The Times and other top sources. Plus opinion, polls, campaign data and video.
Download Now | Learn More
.Readers’ Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (189) »
He said that although he did not support all of it, changes made by Congress after negotiations with the White House had satisfied most of his concerns and had given him enough latitude to manage counterterrorism and foreign policy in keeping with administration principles.
“The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it,” Mr. Obama said in a statement issued in Hawaii, where he is on vacation. “I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”
The bill authorizes $662 billion in military spending through 2012. It is a smaller amount than the Pentagon had asked for, but it does not impose the radical cuts that the military faces in coming years.
The White House had said that the legislation could lead to an improper military role in overseeing detention and court proceedings and could infringe on the president’s authority in dealing with terrorism suspects. But it said that Mr. Obama could interpret the statute in a way that would preserve his authority.
The president, for example, said that he would never authorize the indefinite military detention of American citizens, because “doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.” He also said he would reject a “rigid across-the-board requirement” that suspects be tried in military courts rather than civilian courts.
Congress dropped a provision in the House version of the bill that would have banned using civilian courts to prosecute those suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda. It also dropped a new authorization to use military force against Al Qaeda and its allies.
Civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, still oppose the law, in part because of its authorization of military detention camps overseas. But Mr. Obama’s signature is likely to settle, at least for now, the battle between the White House and Congress over executive authority in the treatment of detainees.
The White House also wrestled with Congress over requirements that the United States punish foreign financial firms that purchase Iranian oil, including through Iran’s central bank. Such a step would greatly increase the pressure on Iran over its nuclear program.
But the administration feared that if the measures were imposed too hastily, they could disrupt the oil market, driving up prices and alienating countries, including close allies, that the United States is seeking to enlist in its pressure campaign against Iran.
Under the terms of the bill, Mr. Obama can delay sanctions by six months to assess their impact on oil prices. The president can also apply to Congress for a waiver exempting a country’s financial firms from sanctions, if he determines that the country significantly reduced its purchases of Iranian oil in the preceding 180 days. Or he can apply for a waiver exempting a country on national security grounds.
Senate Republicans, who pushed for the tougher sanctions, said it would be difficult for Mr. Obama to invoke a waiver, since it could make him look weak on Iran in an election year. But the administration said it was committed to imposing the sanctions.
“We have to do it in a timely way and phased way to avoid repercussions to the oil market, and make sure the revenues to Iran are reduced,” said an administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “But we believe we can do that.” |
|
