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.

 

S.1867: Can they really detain us? Let's find out.

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by eywadevotee
Us citizens cannot have mandatory military detainment, though they COULD be detained indefinitely in "cilvilian custody" and "temporarily" detaioned in military custody. The bill is a disgusting disgrace to our Constitution.


Even then, in civilian custody they can only hold for 48 or 72 hours, then they either have to charge you or release you. Is that not right? Or am I missing something.
edit on 15-12-2011 by Skewed because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) in military custody as an unprivileged enemy belligerent pending disposition under the law of war.

(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.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FissionSurplus
 


I don't see anything there that says US citizens can be detained forever with out a trial.....

No one is saying that US citizens cannot be detained.... It is only being said that we cannot be detained forever, with out a trial to either prove our guilt or innocence.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by lifespath420
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) in military custody as an unprivileged enemy belligerent pending disposition under the law of war.

(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.


Hmmm, can you show me where it says that US citizens can be detained indefinitely with out a trial?

I am not seeing it. Sorry.

edit on 15-12-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by MissSmartypants
 


There's no such thing as semantics with bills like these. Everything is worded precisely. : ) That a US citizen isn't required to be detained under certain conditions doesn't mean that they can't be - it just means that others under those conditions are indeed REQUIRED to be. I'm gonna research more in detail to see what I conclude.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
I am not at my regular computer so this is not word for word but there is a part of this that says, the president has power to over ride anything he wants, he CAN say that someone is a terrorist even a U.S. citizen, when I get home I will link it, OR I will find some time and search for it.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by pierregustavetoutant
The bill doesn't REQUIRE the executive or the military to detain citizens indefinitely under those circumstances. It doesn't bar them from doing so. They can just do it at their discretion




No, that section of the bill is entitled Requirement for military custody and states that US citizens are not a group that can be detained forever.

We still have our right to a trial. Nothing has changed.

If you go blow up a building and are labeled a terrorist, you can rest assured that you will not be detained forever with out a trial to prove whether or not you are guilty....




posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by hapablab
I am not at my regular computer so this is not word for word but there is a part of this that says, the president has power to over ride anything he wants, he CAN say that someone is a terrorist even a U.S. citizen, when I get home I will link it, OR I will find some time and search for it.


yep, US citizens can be detained. But not indefinitely, unless they receive a trial to prove their guilt or innocence.




posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
No they cannot. Any citizen can be detained, but we have the right to a trial that has not been taking away. We cannot and will not be detained forever, with out a trial.

There are a couple possible outcomes. Trial is one. Another is detention until the end of hostilities, the classic prisoner of war scenario. This depends on the finding of a judge that the detainee is, in fact, a combatant. In either case, the detainee gets a chance to present his case.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


gimme, seriously, you keep repeating the same sentences. insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result (except in science...). The preceding section of the bill contradicts what you keep saying, so does the aclu statement, so do congressmen, so do people on here etc etc



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
well that sucks..... I know everyone was looking forward to being scared behind their computer screens thinking that the government was out to get them



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli
 


Sure there are a couple of possible out comes, but there is only one factual and legal out come.

Lets say a US citizen commits an act of terrorism against the United States. They will be arrested and detained until the trial they are given ( As per our rights) proves them guilty or innocent.

If proven innocent they are released.If proven guilty then it moves on to sentencing.

Just like if you get arrested for anything else.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


Hi I think I may have this partially figured out, I would like you to highlight exactly where it says that a fair trial is guaranteed. I'm probably staring right at it and not seeing it, perhaps you can point it out please.
edit on 15-12-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by eluzhun
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


gimme, seriously, you keep repeating the same sentences. insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result (except in science...). The preceding section of the bill contradicts what you keep saying, so does the aclu statement, so do congressmen, so do people on here etc etc


Then I am madly insane. Pardon me for having to repeat myself when people keep asking me the same question


No,it does not contradict what I say. I have said exactly what the bill states.

I will repeat myself for you again, since you either refuse to admit you were mistaken( Hey, I was before as well) or you simply do not understand.

The section of this bill is entitled "Requirement for military custody". The Bill states in very clear terms that people can be detained indefinitely, but US citizens and lawful residents are not among those people.

We have this right. The right to a trial. We can be detained, as always. But by law we will receive a trial. If found guilty, then and only then is there a possibility for you to be detained forever.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


Yeah they are saying its not for the People of the USA so that we will be conditioned to the idea when in reality its for us. Take it or leave it.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
reply to post by FissionSurplus
 


I don't see anything there that says US citizens can be detained forever with out a trial.....

No one is saying that US citizens cannot be detained.... It is only being said that we cannot be detained forever, with out a trial to either prove our guilt or innocence.


Your sticking your fingers in your ear going "nyanyanyanya" so you can't hear.

Fissionsurplus nailed it in his post.

If you don't believe him, how about the CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPECIALISTS who are saying the same thing Fission Surplus is??? They are saying he is absolutely right!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is a forbes article that quotes a CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPECIALIST LAWYER who knows a hell of a lot more than you and me... he teaches it!!!

But far more dramatically, the detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”

So despite the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a right to trial, the Senate bill would let the government lock up any citizen it swears is a terrorist, without the burden of proving its case to an independent judge, and for the lifespan of an amorphous war that conceivably will never end. And because the Senate is using the bill that authorizes funding for the military as its vehicle for this dramatic constitutional claim, it’s pretty likely to pass.

forbes
I think i trust the Constitutional Law Teacher here is his credentials:

Robert M. Chesney
Charles I. Francis Professor in Law
Education

JD Harvard
BS Texas Christian University
Areas of Specialty

Constitutional Law
International Law
National Security Law


He's not the only Constitutional Lawyer who's saying this. They say Fissionsurplus is right! This is a classic loophole that allows them to say one thing and do another.... you know... like the do all the time!



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 

Coincidentally, none of those links work. However, judging by the text provided, that in and of itself is not an 'exemption'. To me, that says... If we arrest a citizen/legal alien (suspected of terrorism), this bill does not require the military to detain them. In no way do those words say... If we arrest a citizen/legal alien, we are not allowed to detain them. However, I need more insight into the surrounding and referenced text (which is obviously unavailable at the moment) in order to develop my conclusion.



The second provision (section 1032), however, does not include an exemption for U.S. citizens, and would give the government “the legal authority to keep people suspected of terrorism in military custody, indefinitely and without trial.”

Link

edit on 15-12-2011 by TomServo because: (no reason given)




But Section 1021 (c) still remains and states: "The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following: (1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities authorized by the Authorization to Use Military Force."

Link[editb y]edit on 15-12-2011 by TomServo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


Hi I think I may have this partially figured out, I would like you to highlight exactly where it says that a fair trial is guaranteed. I'm probably staring right at it and not seeing it, perhaps you can point it out please.
edit on 15-12-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)


You are looking at the wrong bill as far as our right to a free trial.

Try reading the bill of rights.



Right to a fair trial

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.


This right has not been taken away from US citizens.

Here, read this from bill s.1867


(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.


That is who the bill applies to. These are who can be detained indefinitely.


Now read this part.


(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.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.


Simply it says that members of al-queida and non US citizens planning terrorist attacks on US soil, can be detained indefinitely. US citizens, can be detained, but not indefinitely. We do not apply to that law.

That combined with our right to a fair trial, ensured that US citizens will not be detained indefinitely,unless,perhaps they are found guilty and they are sentenced to life in prison.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


I am doing no such thing and honestly I do not appreciate you making such an accusation.Do you see my username? It's not just a username,it's a way of life for me.

I did the research and read the bill.

Again, I used to think that we could be detained forever with this bill as well....But then I stopped taking other peoples word for it and read the bill.

Read my previous post. It's laid out pretty clear.

Hey, if I am mistaken I will be the first to admit it and apologize. I just am not seeing anything to make me think I am mistaken.

I am seeing what this bill says, and then what other people are saying and it is two different things.
edit on 15-12-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by pierregustavetoutant
The bill doesn't REQUIRE the executive or the military to detain citizens indefinitely under those circumstances. It doesn't bar them from doing so. They can just do it at their discretion




No, that section of the bill is entitled Requirement for military custody and states that US citizens are not a group that can be detained forever.

We still have our right to a trial. Nothing has changed.

If you go blow up a building and are labeled a terrorist, you can rest assured that you will not be detained forever with out a trial to prove whether or not you are guilty....



No, dude, you're not listening. You are confusing "Requirement" with "permission." The military is not REQUIRED to detain US Citizens under the circumstances that they are REQUIRED to do the same to non citizens. This provision says nothing whatsoever about PERMISSION. The bill, in large part, gives PERMISSION to indefinitely detain people without trial. The SECTION you are looking at details when they are REQUIRED to exercise that permission.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join