yeah, i'm gonna have to say i'm uncomfortable with this.....
Pepe Silvia
Posts: 3,758
so, basically they could put you in military custody for whatever reason a president comes up with, you'll have no miranda rights, no right to a trial?? if i read this right if you were held for supporting terror you would be held until the war on terror is over?
i'm only posting parts of it i think are most important but feel free to read the whole thing
http://www.legitgov.org/enemy_belligerent_act_2010.pdf
111TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION S. ll
To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ____ Mr. MCCAIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on ____ A BILL To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ''Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010''.
March 4, 2010 (12:06 p.m.)
ARM10090 S.L.C.
SEC. 2. PLACEMENT OF SUSPECTED UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS IN MILITARY CUSTODY.
(a) MILITARY CUSTODY REQUIREMENT.-Whenever within the United States, its territories, and possessions, or outside the territorial limits of the United States, an individual is captured or otherwise comes into the custody or under the effective control of the United States who is suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners through an act of terrorism, or by other means in violation of the laws of war, or of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities, and who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent, the individual shall be placed in military custody for purposes of initial interrogation and determination of status in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
(b) REASONABLE DELAY FOR INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES.-An individual who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent and who is initially captured or otherwise comes into the custody or under the effective control of the United States by an intelligence agency of the United States may be held, interrogated, or transported by the intelligence agency and placed into military custody for purposes of this Act if retained by the United States within a reasonable time after the capture or coming into the custody or effective control by the intelligence agency, giving due consideration to operational needs and requirements to avoid compromise or disclosure of an intelligence mission or intelligence sources or methods.
(3) INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN STATEMENT AND RIGHTS.-A individual who is suspected of being an unprivileged enemy belligerent shall not, during interrogation under this subsection, be provided the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436 (1966)) or otherwise be informed of any rights that the individual may or may not have to counsel or to remain silent consistent with Miranda v. Arizona.
(2) CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF INDIVIDUALS AS HIGH-VALUE DETAINEES.-The regulations required by this subsection shall include criteria for designating an individual as a high-value detainee based on the following:(A) The potential threat the individual poses for an attack on civilians or civilian facilities within the United States or upon United States citizens or United States civilian facilities abroad at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States.(B) The potential threat the individual poses to United States military personnel or United States military facilities at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States.(C) The potential intelligence value of the individual.(D) Membership in al Qaeda or in a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda.(E) Such other matters as the President considers appropriate.
(3) PARAMOUNT PURPOSE OF INTERROGATIONS.-The regulations required by this subsection shall provide that the paramount purpose of the interrogation of high-value detainees under this Act shall be the protection of United States civilians and United States civilian facilities through thorough and professional interrogation for intelligence purposes.
SEC. 5. DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL OF UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS. An individual, including a citizen of the United States, determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent under section 3(c)(2) in a manner which satisfies Article 5 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War may be detained without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported, consistent with the law of war and any authorization for the use of military force provided by Congress pertaining to such hostilities.
i'm only posting parts of it i think are most important but feel free to read the whole thing
http://www.legitgov.org/enemy_belligerent_act_2010.pdf
111TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION S. ll
To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ____ Mr. MCCAIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on ____ A BILL To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ''Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010''.
March 4, 2010 (12:06 p.m.)
ARM10090 S.L.C.
SEC. 2. PLACEMENT OF SUSPECTED UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS IN MILITARY CUSTODY.
(a) MILITARY CUSTODY REQUIREMENT.-Whenever within the United States, its territories, and possessions, or outside the territorial limits of the United States, an individual is captured or otherwise comes into the custody or under the effective control of the United States who is suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners through an act of terrorism, or by other means in violation of the laws of war, or of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities, and who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent, the individual shall be placed in military custody for purposes of initial interrogation and determination of status in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
(b) REASONABLE DELAY FOR INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES.-An individual who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent and who is initially captured or otherwise comes into the custody or under the effective control of the United States by an intelligence agency of the United States may be held, interrogated, or transported by the intelligence agency and placed into military custody for purposes of this Act if retained by the United States within a reasonable time after the capture or coming into the custody or effective control by the intelligence agency, giving due consideration to operational needs and requirements to avoid compromise or disclosure of an intelligence mission or intelligence sources or methods.
(3) INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN STATEMENT AND RIGHTS.-A individual who is suspected of being an unprivileged enemy belligerent shall not, during interrogation under this subsection, be provided the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436 (1966)) or otherwise be informed of any rights that the individual may or may not have to counsel or to remain silent consistent with Miranda v. Arizona.
(2) CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF INDIVIDUALS AS HIGH-VALUE DETAINEES.-The regulations required by this subsection shall include criteria for designating an individual as a high-value detainee based on the following:(A) The potential threat the individual poses for an attack on civilians or civilian facilities within the United States or upon United States citizens or United States civilian facilities abroad at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States.(B) The potential threat the individual poses to United States military personnel or United States military facilities at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States.(C) The potential intelligence value of the individual.(D) Membership in al Qaeda or in a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda.(E) Such other matters as the President considers appropriate.
(3) PARAMOUNT PURPOSE OF INTERROGATIONS.-The regulations required by this subsection shall provide that the paramount purpose of the interrogation of high-value detainees under this Act shall be the protection of United States civilians and United States civilian facilities through thorough and professional interrogation for intelligence purposes.
SEC. 5. DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL OF UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS. An individual, including a citizen of the United States, determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent under section 3(c)(2) in a manner which satisfies Article 5 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War may be detained without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported, consistent with the law of war and any authorization for the use of military force provided by Congress pertaining to such hostilities.
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Whip the public into a blinkered frenzy of fear, and strip them of their basic human rights in the process.
It's amazing how easily fooled people are. I've been reading a thing or two lately about the Cultural Revolution in China between 1967 and 1976 - during which the population was encouraged to destroy anything 'old' and traditional, and were even encouraged/forced to denounce, beat, and sometimes kill members of their own family - and have wondered how so many people could be so easily led and abused by just a handful of people in positions of power.
The Jews in Europe in the 1930's had their rights slowly eroded bit-by-bit until the net had closed completely around them. Shit like the above needs to be nipped in the bud before it gets out of hand.
It would be a big stretch to compare America to Cultural Revolution China or to 1930's Germany, but you are now being asked to accept the possibility of your being imprisoned with no charge for an indefinite period of time, which on it's own is pretty fucked-up.
I wonder what will come next?
Maybe one day just voicing support for the Palestinian resistance could land you a lifetime behind bars in the U.S?
The latter possibility seems a tad far-fetched, since there's no formal government mandate that everyone must support Israel, nor have there been any major attempts to quash free-speech around this issue. But yeah, I actually agree with you (gasp!) ... If people accept the notion of imprisonment with no charge now, who's going to put the brakes on possible further restrictions of freedom later?