[zapfrog]

The language in question is from sections 1031 and 1032 while I notice most who are in favor completely ignore these sections and quote sections 1021 and 1022.

[Psudo]

I was quoting 1021 and 1022 because it is what the critics in that article quoted, but just to ensure I've missed nothing:

2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA, pdf), Sections 1031 and 1032 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA, pdf), Sections 1031 and 1032:

SEC. 1031. COUNTERTERRORISM OPERATIONAL BRIEFING REQUIREMENT.
(a) BRIEFINGS REQUIRED.—Beginning not later than March 1, 2012, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional defense committees quarterly briefings outlining Department of Defense counterterrorism operations and related activities involving special operations forces.
(b) ELEMENTS.—Each briefing under subsection (a) shall include each of the following:
(1) A global update on activity within each geographic combatant command.
(2) An overview of authorities and legal issues including limitations.
(3) An outline of interagency activities and initiatives.
(4) Any other matters the Secretary considers appropriate.
SEC. 1032. NATIONAL SECURITY PLANNING GUIDANCE TO DENY SAFE HAVENS TO AL-QAEDA AND ITS VIOLENT EXTREMIST AFFILIATES.
(a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to improve interagency strategic planning and execution to more effectively integrate efforts to deny safe havens and strengthen at-risk states to further the goals of the National Security Strategy related to the disruption, dismantlement, and defeat of al-Qaeda and its violent extremist affiliates.
(b) NATIONAL SECURITY PLANNING GUIDANCE.—
(1) GUIDANCE REQUIRED.—The President shall issue classified or unclassified national security planning guidance in support of objectives stated in the national security strategy report submitted to Congress by the President pursuant to section 108 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404a) to deny safe havens to al-Qaeda and its violent extremist affiliates and to strengthen at-risk states. Such guidance shall serve as the strategic plan that governs United States and coordinated international efforts to enhance the capacity of governmental and nongovernmental entities to work toward the goal of eliminating the ability of al-Qaeda and its violent extremist affiliates to establish or maintain safe havens.
(2) CONTENTS OF GUIDANCE.—The guidance required under paragraph (1) shall include each of the following:
(A) A prioritized list of specified geographic areas that the President determines are necessary to address and an explicit discussion and list of the criteria or rationale used to prioritize the areas on the list, including a discussion of the conditions that would hamper the ability of the United States to strengthen at-risk states or other entities in such areas.
(B) For each specified geographic area, a description, analysis, and discussion of the core problems and contributing issues that allow or could allow al-Qaeda and its violent extremist affiliates to use the area as a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks, engage in propaganda, or raise funds and other support, including any ongoing or potential radicalization of the population, or to use the area as a key transit route for personnel, weapons, funding, or other support.
(C) A list of short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals for each specified geographic area, prioritized by importance.
(D) A description of the role and mission of each Federal department and agency involved in executing the guidance, including the Departments of Defense, Justice, Treasury, and State and the Agency for International Development.
(E) A description of gaps in United States capabilities to meet the goals listed pursuant to subparagraph (C), and the extent to which those gaps can be met through coordination with nongovernmental, international, or private sector organizations, entities, or companies.
(3) REVIEW AND UPDATE OF GUIDANCE.—The President shall review and update the guidance required under paragraph (1) as necessary. Any such review shall address each of the following:
(A) The overall progress made toward achieving the goals listed pursuant to paragraph (2)(C), including an overall assessment of the progress in denying a safe haven to al-Qaeda and its violent extremist affiliates.
(B) The performance of each Federal department and agency involved in executing the guidance.
(C) The performance of the unified country team and appropriate combatant command, or in the case of a cross-border effort, country teams in the area and the appropriate combatant command.
(D) Any addition to, deletion from, or change in the order of the prioritized list maintained pursuant to paragraph (2)(A).
(4) SPECIFIED GEOGRAPHIC AREA DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term "specified geographic area" means any country, subnational territory, or region—
(A) that serves or may potentially serve as a safe haven for al-Qaeda or a violent extremist affiliate of al-Qaeda—
(i) from which to plan and launch attacks, engage in propaganda, or raise funds and other support; or
(ii) for use as a key transit route for personnel, weapons, funding, or other support; and
(B) over which one or more governments or entities exert insufficient governmental or security control to deny al-Qaeda and its violent extremist affiliates the ability to establish a large scale presence.

Oh noes, strategic antiterrorism intelligence disclosed to Congress! The horror!

Seriously, explain what part of this is controversial.

[coaster_dot]

Just a little update:

My new job has plants and work out all over Canada. My plan is to finish up this project, then graduate and be like "hey, send me somewhere out of the country preferably Canada" since I saw they need help in Montreal, Sask, and somewhere south west B.C.. Right now I am doing Variant Configuration, System Analysis and programing in SAP. Job outlook is promising and it seems like I can go pretty much anywhere with it. It's crazy to think, three years ago when I first joined I never thought I would be this close to immigration, let alone a job this good.

[Unsound]

Congratulations

It's kinda funny, one of the reasons I'm still with my company is the possibility of eventually transeferring to a branch in Arizona or Nevada.

[FurTrader4]

Congratulations the more doors you can open in your future the better!

[pineywoodslim]

I'm an American who lurked here for awhile while planning a recent trip to the Atlantic provinces.

Why am I here? Certainly not to promote the US. I am most likely a stronger critic of much of American politics and society than most Canadians, though there are certainly many positive aspects to US culture.

I am here just out of curiosity I guess, to explore the similarities and differences between the two nations--for example, the state of Maine and the province of New Brunswick, while different, are similar in many ways, with probably more in common with each other than either has with my state of Iowa.

[Jonny_C]

I've just joined this forum and found this thread to be very interesting.

I've been a member for years at an American forum called the "Quarter Moon Saloon". That forum - and its previous iterations - have always had a significant international component, but the American content is predominantly conservative/Republican, and gets repetitive at times. Still, it's a pretty good forum, not generally populated by wackos, not heavily moderated, and broad in its topics.

A couple of years ago I looked for a similar Canadian forum and didn't run across one. This forum, therefore, is a pleasant surprise... to me anyway.

Be patient, I'm getting around to the thread topic.

I browsed this forum pretty extensively today and it seems to have a variety of humour, cleverness, and expressive thought. In addition, it's got enough members to keep the pace lively, it's attractively laid out (and easy to follow and post), and I like the increased Canadian focus from what I'm used to.

Those could all be reasons why Americans (and others) like to drop in, have a look, and stay to participate. I think if I were American I would at the very least check a few forums here from time to time - International, Canada-US Relations, Current Events, and Jibber Jabber - and I'd sometimes be interested in giving an American perspective on Canadian issues, as well as finding out what Canadians think of American issues. Getting a view from the outside, so to speak, and not so much limited by home-grown media, and home-grown commentary, and the predictable way they interpret things.

We're good neighbours, and the more we find out about each other the better, even if we sometimes can't readily identify with each other's views.

[Toastmaker]

Agreed - I'm an import from the same forum and really like the opportunity to hear other (Canadian, European, Asian, etc.) outlooks and views of what's happening on our planet and what ought to start happening.

Americans, like most others, react to things and ideas based on their own sphere of experiences. I certainly know that Americans can be rather domineering, arrogant and pushy since we're used to believing our own press about how wonderfull we are. Americans who have been able to travel to or live in foreign societies are more understanding and cooperative with different ideas or opinions. I think this is probably true of Canadians too but we are so close and so bound by practical things and history that it seems natural to know more about what motivates us.

For me, it's interesting to see where the common ground as well as the divisions lie.