I personally doubt very strongly that the intent of it, is to allow authorities to scoop up every five-dollar donor and hold them in prison indefinitely, but that is the sort of thing that might need to be detailed in the law, to try to prevent it's being abused.
Author: Igor

If a police officer believed, on reasonable grounds, that a terrorist activity was going be carried out and suspected on reasonable grounds that the imposition of a recognizance with conditions on a particular person was necessary to prevent it, then that person could be issued a summons or arrested to be brought before a judge.

A recognizance isn't the same as detention without trial; it is a release document used routinely for Federal and Provincial offenses.

I wonder how you feel about the "recognizance with conditions" power of the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act that provides for the detention of a person who has not committed a crime, but is perceived to be the potential perpetrator of a possible crime:

DameRight says: I've read the WHOLE Bill Paul K. and many others, through and through.

Paul K says: You said you read the whole bill......... all 500 pages?

House and Senate negotiators dropped several of the provisions in the House bill that also had drawn a veto threat, including the requirement of military tribunals for all cases.
"We took significant steps to address the administration's concerns," Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, the top Democrat on the House panel, told reporters.

Army Manual Outlines Plan To Kill Rioters, Demonstrators In America

as for the Russians, they're not to invade until martial law is declared which probably will be in October

The U.S. will go to war with Iran in October according to the “plan”

btw the Chinese are the ones pressuring the White House to crack down on private gun ownership stating.... they're coming for them in October while your military is busy fighting Iran

Good lord October is going to suck.

At the 73 min point a caller passes on confidential information which he claims comes from deep inside the government claiming martial law is coming soon

MSG 28: or Barry O saying he's not signing NDAA.... then signs it...

Fourth - while Obama did "threaten" to veto the NDAA, initially, he "reluctantly" signed a somewhat watered-down version AFTER the White House issued a statement saying he would NOT veto the bill:

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/white-house-statement-no-veto-on-ndaa/

Hopefully, based on a clearer understanding of the US legislative process (see above), you can understand how a bill with strong Congressional support would easily overcome a Presidential veto, making a veto futile in such a case.

signing the NDAA into law after saying he wouldn't on New Years Eve proves it.

Actually, I would think Canadians that are concerned about individual liberties would be up in arms about the degradation of their freedom of speech. Canadian laws are more restrictive with respect to that matter than anything we have in the USA.

The NDAA bill he threatened to veto was different than the one he signed.

The OP is Canadian and seems unaware of the fact that the U.S. Constitution trumps any bills (outside of an amendment to our Constitution).

The leftists' dirty little secret is that they hate free speech as much as any brownshirt ever did. The only speech they tolerate is their own--but that's understandable. When you're poorly informed and subscribe to a failed, outdated political philosophy, you can't win legitimate debates, so you have to try to shut your opponents up. That's exactly the purpose of trying to impose "politically correct speech" on everyone. It should be no surprise that PC was dreamed up by Marxist academics--you'd have to travel to places where the jihadists run the show to find a much more intolerant environment than what exists on most university campuses. Maybe that's why leftists are so sympathetic to Islamists.

#32



love how you're so smug & proud of yourself over making this point.[No. Not "smug & proud of myself," just curious why I have to keep reiterating it, since it clearly repudiates your claim that "Obama lied" about signing the NDAA. Too bad your last ditch effort to shore up your theory rests on making my position sound "smug."] does it make you happy knowing your president has to stoop to signing it on New Years Eve without warning while everyone was out getting wasted?[As I attempted to explain to you earlier, the bill would pass regardless of whether or not the President signed it, due to strong Congressional support. He signed it before the expiration in order to facilitate other provisions of the bill, including military pay raises that would have been potentially delayed if he had not signed. Obama was not enthusiastic about signing ("The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it," Mr. Obama said. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16376072), and apparently, waiting until the last minute was a message intended to convey his "reservations" without threatening the people who would be impacted by a delay to their pay and other benefits.] do you even know what's in the NDAA bill?[Yes. But since you don't appear to, allow me to summarize: It does NOT change the provisions for detention from the AUMF (under Bush "In fact, to the extent that the new statutory language will preempt the arguably broader D.C. Circuit definition, it may actually narrow it—if only very slightly. - see the "guide for the perplexed" link below). As a matter of fact, the new legislation specifies such. The NDAA also contains a number of tough sanctions against Iran, and contains funding provisions (as mentioned previously). A failure to sign in time would have had a delay on many areas of military funding.

http://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/pay-raise-faces-delays.html

Hope that helps YOU understand what is in the bill! If not, I have included the link, below.]

MSG 12: Here is a link to a FAQ that has a breakdown of some interesting portions of the NDAA bill. It is eye-opening to understand there is no expansion of the "right to detain" in the NDAA, however, the NDAA bill represents an opportunity to clarify the provisions of the Authorization For Use of Military Force (passed shortly after 9/11) "terrorism" bill:

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/ndaa-faq-a-guide-for-the-perplexed/

So you mean like how the Republicans censored a female Democrat for using the word vagina in Michigan?

The irony, it burns.

The Republican Speaker of the House Jase Bolger issued a statement saying, "House Republicans often go beyond simply allowing debate by welcoming open and passionate discussion of the issues before this chamber. The only way we can continue doing so, however, is to ensure that the proper level of maturity and civility are maintained on the House floor."

Information sources throughout Canada have told me of seeing Russian military officers in full uniform in TORONTO, and whole apartments with with RUSSIAN SPETZNAZ troops. WHAT ARE THEY HERE IN NORTH AMERICA/CANADA FOR???

Previous sources of information including a MILITARY VETERANS WATCHDOG GROUP warned me of GERMAN BUNDESWEHR (military) coming into the country of CANADA. German and Russian tanks also coming in with them. Some landed at first on PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND and then proceeded into Canada. Many of the foreign troops in AMERICA came in through CANADA and ALASKA also.

Richard Dubeau of Toronto, Ontario, told me of a horrifying situation. Richard warns people of coming MARTIAL LAW/NWO takeover in CANADA and sells emergency food supplies to help people survive. Richard told me of a special visit from an RCMP one day. Introducing himself, the RCMP came into Richard's home. He revealed the following information: "I am here to tell you, that UNDER MARTIAL LAW in Canada, I have been assigned to TERMINATE YOU! But because you are an innocent man, and I am a good man, I have resigned from this assignment. Simply know that YOU ARE MARKED FOR TERMINATION under martial law in Canada!" He then left a very shocked Richard's home.

Interestingly, when I lectured in a church in Abbottsford, BC, I talked to the pastor afterwards. He told me of what his daughter told him at that time. She works for the RCMP.

"My daughter told me, 'Dad, I can't tell you everything, but just KNOW that the RCMP is monitoring Canadian citizens and collecting a list of NAMES OF PEOPLE IN CANADA and putting it together for the future....'" He presumed that they were people profiled to be arrested and terminated, just like in AMERICA, under a similar state of MARTIAL LAW coming also to CANADA in the future.

Now, follow this scenario and line of thought. I later go live on radio in TORONTO on "CLOAK AND DAGGER" broadcast. As I am being interviewed by Sherman Skolnick and Lenny Bloom, I began to state, " When martial law is triggered in CANADA, I exhort the RCMP to exercise restraint towards the Canadians they are going to apprehend, arrest and....."

RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS STATEMENT THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT INTERRUPTS THIS BROADCAST AND CUTS ME OFF THE AIR! I certainly made them very nervous that night as I was about to reveal what the RCMP was going to do to Canadian citizens under martial law...just like RICHARD'S EXPERIENCE with the RCMP!

that is true - unless martial law is declared. in that case, the bill of rights will be suspended and the authorities will run the show . . . what happens if martial law is declared prior to the 2012 presidential election?

more importantly, what happens if martial law is declared prior to the 2012 presidential election?

The Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus Act aim to deter dictatorship while permitting a narrow window for the president to temporarily use the military at home. But the 2006 reforms basically threw any concern about dictatorial abuses out the window.

Section 1076 of the Defense Authorization Act of 2006 changed the name of the key provision in the statute book from “Insurrection Act” to “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.” The Insurrection Act of 1807 stated that the president could deploy troops within the United States only “to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.” The new law expands the list of pretexts to include “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition” — and such a “condition” is not defined or limited.

MSG 17: While there were previous provisions to arrest a person for threats against the body or property of another, "The use of the recognizance with conditions was only available under strictly defined conditions and was subject to numerous procedural safeguards. Except for emergency or exigent circumstances, the consent of the Attorney General was required beforehand. "

Canada's ATA provisions have opened these grounds up to a far broader interpretation.

http://www.justice.gc.ca/antiter/faqs-faq-eng.asp#Q9

EXACTLY, so why the hostility?? For all intents and purposes, she is in another country so why should she care so much about what happens here when it doesn't even affect her? Sounds like she's trying to create some famous forum drama....