Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
Dear this_is_who_we_are,
Thank you for responding to me and pointing out something interesting. Forgive me if I have to ask you for further clarification. You see, the point you underlined says that the provisions of paragraph one can be waived, but you circled paragraph 2.
Paragraph 1 directs that the military shall hold a person, blah blah blah. So the waiver provision you've pointed out means that the Secretary of Defense can order a person to be not held if it helps national security.
Am I missing something?
With respect,
Charles1952
Originally posted by ChuckNasty
You guys are all sheep believing anything the media shoves into your mouths.
Read the bill section thingie, pg 362 of: www.gpo.gov...
Read the ACLU article that seems to be pushing the Udall amendment: www.aclu.org...
Read the Udall proposed amendment: www.scribd.com...
Doesn't apply to US citizens and legal aliens...but if you commit a crime, I'm sure you'll be locked up.
The Udall amendment puts the guantanamo bay guys into our civil courts to be tried with the same rights as a US citizen... They deserve to rot in jail for failing in their terrorist duty of blowing themselves up.
Stop being sheep.
If the Udall amendment is allowed, be prepared for some really pissed off Guantanamo prisoners to get back at us. I'm sure the civil courts would find no evidence on convicting 99% of them.
Originally posted by ChuckNasty
Originally posted by ChuckNasty
You guys are all sheep believing anything the media shoves into your mouths.
Read the bill section thingie, pg 362 of: www.gpo.gov...
Read the ACLU article that seems to be pushing the Udall amendment: www.aclu.org...
Read the Udall proposed amendment: www.scribd.com...
Doesn't apply to US citizens and legal aliens...but if you commit a crime, I'm sure you'll be locked up.
The Udall amendment puts the guantanamo bay guys into our civil courts to be tried with the same rights as a US citizen... They deserve to rot in jail for failing in their terrorist duty of blowing themselves up.
Stop being sheep.
Bump for myself - can't believe so many people get caught up in what is posted in the news vs what is fact. If the Udall amendment is allowed, be prepared for some really pissed off Guantanamo prisoners to get back at us. I'm sure the civil courts would find no evidence on convicting 99% of them. Gooooo team!
Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
Colorado Senator Mark Udall should be Shot for Treason Against the People of the United States for Sponsoring this Bill . Thankfully , it was Soundly Defeated today in the Senate..........
www.prisonplanet.com...
would have provided oversight to check the military’s power to arrest U.S. citizens as suspected terrorists on American soil and detain them indefinitely without trial.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
If you go back to section 1031, you will see the defintion of a COVERED person. 1032 specifically states it dos not afffeect nor is it applied in any way shape or form to US Citizens.
Originally posted by MegaMind
Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
If you go back to section 1031, you will see the defintion of a COVERED person. 1032 specifically states it dos not afffeect nor is it applied in any way shape or form to US Citizens.
Where in (2) COVERED person does it exempt US citizens?
(4) of 1032 says that the REQUIREMENT to hold persons does not extend to citizens.
In other words they are not REQUIRED to hold citizens but MAY.
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States SHALL hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The REQUIREMENT to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
Check Megamind's reply. This clause waives the "Covered Persons" clause at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense,It seems to me that the waiver clause you're referring to says that it waives the provisions of paragraph 1. Are we in agreement there?
meaning a U.S. Citizen is not exempt from military arrest under the provisions of the Bill.This part I agree with. But only if we're talking about a US citizen who is part of, or collaborating with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or, well you can read the rest of it.
