Senate Bill Demands the Military Lock Up American Citizens without due process of LAW

[Glocktogo]

Is anyone but me creeped out by the fact that the bill is exactly 666 pages long?

 

[Shadowrider]

That's just a short summary of the bill.
Here is the complete bill. Jump to page 359

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1253rs/pdf/BILLS-112s1253rs.pdf

I'm no lawyer but I believe that both the left and the right are alarmed by the following clause:

CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATION ON APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES PERSONS.-The authority to
detain a person under this section does not extend to the
detention of citizens or lawful resident aliens of the United
States on the basis of conduct taking place within the
United States except to the extent permitted by the Con
stitution of the United States.

So, if a US citizen travels to Canada or Europe and the .gov determines they meet the other criteria listed in those sections, they can detain indefinitely said U.S. Citizen.

I just read that section and that scenario that they are upset about seems like it would be a serious "stretch". Read the "In general" part Sec. 1031(a) at the very first of the section and then read 1031(b). They are specifically talking about persons involved in the 9/11 attack(s) specifically and al-Quaeda, Taliban, etc.

But it's late and I went through it pretty quick. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Is anyone but me creeped out by the fact that the bill is exactly 666 pages long?

Yes.

 

[doctorjj]

I just read that section and that scenario that they are upset about seems like it would be a serious "stretch". Read the "In general" part Sec. 1031(a) at the very first of the section and then read 1031(b). They are specifically talking about persons involved in the 9/11 attack(s) specifically and al-Quaeda, Taliban, etc.

But it's late and I went through it pretty quick. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.


Yes.

Yeah, but aren't you in al Queda or the Taliban as soon as they say you are?

 

[Hobbes]

Yeah, but aren't you in al Queda or the Taliban as soon as they say you are?

Precisely!

The way it's supposed to work is you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law after a fair trial by your peers.
This way, you are guilty, period, and you have no court or jury or legal recourse of any kind.

I'm sure the motivation behind it was a case like John Lindh who joined the Taliban(before the US became engaged in Afghanistan) but
most people who truly respect the Constitution would have just said "This bill does Not apply to US citizens"

I just read that section and that scenario that they are upset about seems like it would be a serious "stretch". Read the "In general" part Sec. 1031(a) at the very first of the section and then read 1031(b). They are specifically talking about persons involved in the 9/11 attack(s) specifically and al-Quaeda, Taliban, etc.

Are you saying that a U.S. citizen who is accused of participating loses his rights under the U.S. Constitution to trial in the Justice system?

 

[Biggsly]

They are specifically talking about persons involved in the 9/11 attack(s) specifically and al-Quaeda, Taliban, etc.

Sorry, but this reminds me of this.
[Broken External Image]

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

The entire bill is unconstitutional. Spending bills can only originate in the House of Representatives.

Woody

 

[Billybob]

Rand Paul, Judge Napolitano

ATTENTION PREPPERS Having More Than 7 Days Of Food Makes You A Suspected Terrorist.avi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqepk2oK0P8&feature=player_embedded#!

 

[WTJ]

Is anyone but me creeped out by the fact that the bill is exactly 666 pages long?

Hell, I thought everything coming from the District of Communists had the Mark on it. Not surprised at all, but it IS a bit creepy.

 

[tran]

If Barry get re-elected I am more than positive he will go after the gun owners of America.

 

[Shadowrider]

Precisely!

The way it's supposed to work is you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law after a fair trial by your peers.
This way, you are guilty, period, and you have no court or jury or legal recourse of any kind.

I'm sure the motivation behind it was a case like John Lindh who joined the Taliban(before the US became engaged in Afghanistan) but
most people who truly respect the Constitution would have just said "This bill does Not apply to US citizens" I suspect you are correct about John Lindh and agree completely about exempting US Citizens.



Are you saying that a U.S. citizen who is accused of participating loses his rights under the U.S. Constitution to trial in the Justice system?

No I'm not saying that. Go back and read the O/P. That sentiment is all over the web on the communista, libertarian and conservative blogs, heck they read exactly like the O/P. I was just pointing out that the bill is not targeting ALL U.S. Citizens per the portion you posted. The sentiment of the O/P's article sounds really "out of context". What's new? But they are targeting those actually involved in the 9/11 attacks and the WOT. Note my comment above in your quote. I just don't see how this can pass constitutional muster unless it exempts US citizens entirely, if they do it would probably fly. Besides it should be voted down for no other reason that it's 666 freaking pages long! Or the fact that Mcain crossed over to work with Comrade Carl Levin to write this mess. Also RINO Lindsey Graham is one board with it. So yes, it needs to do down in flames.