It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by BamStonin
Gotta love that this is what we are paying politicians to do. Giving them the power to imprison, without cause, the very people that put them in power to be able to do so. If any one thinks that they wouldnt abuse this law you'd be in denial. Why else would they even draft something like this? Do you think the military doesnt already snatch people up in other countries without permission? The US has never been one to ask for permission from anyone. They operate off an act now, think later mentality. This would give them the ability to extend this absurdity to our own country. And, look who is supporting it for gods sake. John Mcain? Lindsay Graham??? Really??? Even the idea of this is wildly dangerous.
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-
(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.
(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined--
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(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.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by Xcathdra
why if it does not acually apply to americans did rand paul give this speach?
Probably the same reason the ACLU is stating it allows the detention of citizens. Apparetly they ahve not read the bill in its entirety to understand it.
The first part denotes those who are covered by the law. Section 1032 states how the process works and specifically notes US Citizens are NOT subject to military detention.
Even with the facts present, people want to seel it as something its not just for the fear factor.
This bill does NOT allow US citizens to be held indefinitely with no charge.
just because you think americans have the right to attack doesnt mean they lose their rights.
just because you excuse yourself from recognising some one as human does not remove their human rights
only GOD can take away what GOD has given
your legal jargon does not change this,
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.