It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Executive Order Targets Fourth Amendment

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Remember when Barry Obama said he would close Gitmo because it wasn’t right to hold people without formal charges and trials? He made the pledge soon after assuming the ceremonial throne. He said he would get it done within 12 months.



Now comes word that Obama will sign an executive order that will formalize indefinite detention without trial of detainees kidnapped on the battlefields of undeclared and illegal wars.




Earlier this month, Congress passed on a 212-206 vote a bill that forbids Obama and crew from transferring any detainees held at Guantanamo Bay to the United States and giving them trials. The bill mentions by name the al-Qaeda scary man and poster child for the forever war against mercurial terror, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.



Millions of people bought into Obama’s change mantra. But some of us knew it would be merely a continuation of policies adopted during the Bush regime, policies built upon a foundation created by Bill Clinton


Oh how some things never change!


theintelhub.com...

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.
edit on 12/24/2010 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
This coup has been in the works for the past 100 years. Incrementalism is one of the most powerful tools these people have in their arsenal of weapons.

If you look at the way our rights have been leeched away from us, they tend to work in "fits and starts". The republicans will act as if they are proponents of the bill of rights, but they set the stage for the true fascists (the democrats) to come in during their "turn" at governance, when they promptly do what barack obama has done here so masterfully. Incarceration without due process and without habeas rights by executive order!! Wow!!

YES WE CAN!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Whats really sad is that the liberals claim they :


represent the litte guy in our society-. they assert there policies on a number of issues , and portray themselves as superior to the Conservatives. But when the positions the left advocate are anyalyzed and comapred with their policies and actions, it becomes clear there's and enormous disconnect between the two.


But then you have the Repub's, who try to convey they too are for the rights and liberties, using these phrases as punctuation, and yet still have no idea of what " code " should really stand for!



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Don't see why he cannot try them in a military court right there. That was the original plan Bush had. Nothing wrong with it. Our military courts function quite well and the defendent is given a lawyer and a fair hearing. The advantage is that nothing classified becomes public domain and there is no threat to a local population with protesters who various activists would bus in or from terrorists trying to blow up the court buildings.

However, that is not what Obama seems to be saying. He is saying just keep them there forever. Well, that is a progressive liberal for you.

The detainees should be given a trial and sentenced if found guilty or let go if found not guilty although most of the ones in that category have already been let go and various reports show that at least a fourth of those returned to some terrorist group and actiivities wherever they went.

Not to mention that no country has offered to take any of the ones who are left there. They know what they are and have enough problems dealing with the ones they already have.

Actually, we should simply drop them in southern Mexico in exchange for all of the Mexicans who run over out borders every night or send them to Venezuela.....so many Catholics, so little time!



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
Don't forget the link
theintelhub.com...



posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Hmmm. Sounds to me like Congress blocked closing Gitmo and releasing the detainees - and that Obama is trying to use an Executive Order to get around Congress...



“If Congress blocks the administration’s ability to put detainees on trial or transfer them out of Guantanamo… the executive order could still be implemented,” the Post explains.

“I would argue that you still have to go ahead because you can’t simply have people confined to a life sentence without any review and then fight another day with Congress,” said a senior administration official.


?????



posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


You should probably change the name of this thread since the 4th amendment has nothing to do with this. Also the 4th Amendment does not apply to the individual, only the Government.
edit on 24-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Here's the thing.

Per the Geneva Conventions - Any combatant (carrying a weapon) without a standard, recognizable uniform, legally ceases to exist.

You don't have to take them prisoner, they have zero rights as accorded uniformed, prisoners of war, and every breath they take is at your convenience.

Separate those who were non-uniformed combatants, and just shoot them. Problem solved.

That should take care of 99.9% of them, and THEN don't take any more non-unformed personnel prisoner.

Problem prevented.

This isn't rocket science, and we clearly have the dumbest leadership on the planet.

Use the Geneva Conventions rules as they are written, understood, and agreed to.

Weapon, but no uniform? Shoot them. Just shoot them. Or, if noise discipline is required for the moment, surely someone can lay their hand on a knife, thick stick, cinder block, or similar item.

This crap over Gitmo is and has been a big, big, mistake.



posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenadots
 


Our military courts function quite well and the defendent is given a lawyer and a fair hearing. The advantage is that nothing classified becomes public domain and there is no threat to a local population with protesters who various activists would bus in or from terrorists trying to blow up the court buildings.


A fair hearing in a military court.??
Is this before or after the water boarding and other dubious interrogation techniques many consider torture??



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 
The Supreme Court has already found that detainees are entitled to judicial review of their detention.

Military tribunals are not responsible for interrogation tactics and have themselves found that some testimony and evidence were not trustworthy due to the methods by which they were obtained. Remember that terrorist combatants DESPISE and reject American social norms and standards until they meet their political needs.

Under their systems, they would have been executed years ago.

As combatants captured overseas, the Al Qaeda and Taliban detainees are not otherwise entitled to ANY other U.S. constitutional "process." Should we extend these privileges to the Mexican and Columbian drug cartels, as well? How about Hamas, Hezbollah and Fatah?



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


"As combatants captured overseas, the Al Qaeda and Taliban detainees are not otherwise entitled to ANY other U.S. constitutional "process." Should we extend these privileges to the Mexican and Columbian drug cartels, as well? How about Hamas, Hezbollah and Fatah? "

Yes. Allowing politicians, not courts, to summarily punish is about as nazi as it gets. Trusting the govt and their shadowy overlords to proclaim guilt is historically stupid. If so called "terrorists" / "enemies of America" are as evil and dangerous as the govt claims, explaining it to 12 average Americans in open court should be easy.

BTW, who, again?, found these supposed no rights deserving folks guilty of being a "terrorist", or came to the conclusion they were members of "Fatah" who were guilty of wrong doing?.. some govt lord-god-king of virtue?.. lol.. who oozes truth, honesty and rule of law values like bush, cheney or obama?.. lmao..

"OBEY"



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by FarArcher
 


"Weapon, but no uniform? Shoot them."

US citizens don't wear uniforms..

Seeing as how bush defined the whole world as a battlefield in the (fake) “War on Terror”... step outside and you don't matter, legally.

Of course if you don't matter "legally", nobody can get upset "legally", feel anger "legally" or "legally" miss you... but once they avenge your non legal death.. it's "illegal".



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? his fury is poured out like fire, and the rocks are thrown down by him.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


Are your rights derived from the constitution and your government or by your creator?



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by GovtFlu
 

Allowing politicians, not courts, to summarily punish is about as nazi as it gets.


Epic FAIL. Military tribunals are not staffed by politicians.

"Politicians," as in elected officials, includes most state judges.

All federal judges are appointed and approved by "politicians." So, to whom would you entrust punishment?

Of course, this ignores that there is no such thing as "summary punishment," in either the criminal, civil or military courts. Even at Gitmo, many detainees have been released after their hearings; but, facts and truth don't matter to zealots, do they?

On the battlefield in combat, many combatants meet "summary punishment" instead of capture, sometimes at their own hands.


Trusting the govt and their shadowy overlords to proclaim guilt is historically stupid.


So, the judicial branch is not "govt?" Did you skip civics, government and history completely when you attended school, or just fail to comprehend? Define and identify every "shadowy overlord" you are aware of that "proclaim guilt" for U.S. citizens and prisoners. You can not. Unfortunately, for those societies in which "govt" is by religious authority, summary punishment and proclamations of guilt are commonplace. Again, this reality doesn't fit many liberals' agenda, so it is ignored.


If so called "terrorists" / "enemies of America" are as evil and dangerous as the govt claims, explaining it to 12 average Americans in open court should be easy.


No jury in the U.S. is made up of "12 average Americans." Juries are selected by process of elimination from those members of the local community who bother to show up when summoned. (More mis-direction, or more ignorance?) Moreover, many of the detainees have opted NOT for jury trials, but have had their cases heard by judges, instead. They are rightly fearful of a free and informed citizenry.


BTW, who, again?, found these supposed no rights deserving folks guilty of being a "terrorist", or came to the conclusion they were members of "Fatah" who were guilty of wrong doing?.. some govt lord-god-king of virtue?.. lol.. who oozes truth, honesty and rule of law values like bush, cheney or obama?.. lmao..


It is often very easy and comforting to resort to a personal brand of humor when you are confused, lost and out of touch with reality. Laugh all you need 'til you "get it."

deny ignorance

jw



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by jdub297
 
Are your rights derived from the constitution and your government or by your creator?


I am born with inalienable rights as a U.S. citizen. Most of the detainees' creator, and their religious guides, despise these rights and believe we should be exterminated. Do you even know what the Taliban advocate? Jihadi Muslims?

They do not speak of such rights in their own countries and only demand them as propaganda. 40% of detainees released during the Obama administration have returned to their terrorist roots, denial of civil rights and anti-American jihad.

How many foreign prisoners and kidnap victims of terrorists/jihadists have had their rights honored or protected by their captors? ZERO. According to them, "infidels" have NO rights.

deny ignorance

jw



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by jdub297
 


Are your rights derived from the constitution and your government or by your creator?


OUR rights...ALL men's rights...are derived from our creator and are enumerated in the bill of rights and codified in the constitution.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by MMPI2
 


Thanks for the reply? I was asking jdub297. I know where my rights come from, I'm glad to see you do too.

reply to post by jdub297
 


You didn't answer my question. Where are your inalienable rights derived from, the constitution or your creator?



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Jenadots
 


Our military courts function quite well and the defendent is given a lawyer and a fair hearing. The advantage is that nothing classified becomes public domain and there is no threat to a local population with protesters who various activists would bus in or from terrorists trying to blow up the court buildings.


A fair hearing in a military court.??
Is this before or after the water boarding and other dubious interrogation techniques many consider torture??


It comes right before their rights are read to them, but after the death of 3k innocent people on 9/11, in addition to taking up arms to fight against the US and NATO forces, as they are entitled to do. They don't get to bitch because they were captured.

As people have stated about US actions, they made their own bed, now they get to lay in it.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 07:53 PM
link   
What amendment hasn't been targetted yet?



new topics




 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join