US: Immigrants may be held indefinitely

[LeeFisher3]

The current appears to exempt US citizens, but the term 'foreigners' is a little ambiguous. After all, foreigners do become naturalized citizens. Are green card holders exempt? HB-1 holders? Students? It's not clear to me where that line is drawn. Once the ball gets rolling and we hear how many threats have been removed, how long will it be until it also applies to citizens? Remember Timothy McVey?

 

Bill Lets U.S. Citizens Be Held as Enemy Combatants

 

Former White House lawyer Bradford Berenson says the new detainee bill is consistent with what courts have said about the president's right to imprison U.S. citizens as enemy combatants.

 

Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, says the legislation offers U.S. citizens little protection beyond the ability to challenge their appeal. Under the bill, he says, "This administration can simply pick up American citizens and hold them."

 

Maybe it's time for a quiz.

 

Name the countries who arrest and detain their citizens indefinitely without a trial.

The US courts have been doing this for many years in contempt of court cases.

[LeeFisher3]

As I have said before I am not thrilled with the law as it stands.

You have to implicitly trust the honesty and integrity of everyone involved in intelligence gathering and our executive branch, which is not a reasonable thing. It only takes one person with an axe to grind to return us to the days of the red scare and McCarthyism or worse.

 

Is someone willing to suggest some comprehensive ideas on how to deal with the issue of the implied threat, yet help to prevent another 9/11 situation on our own soil. The patriot act goes to one extreme and the other seems to be to do nothing.

 

How do we preserve our liberty and freedom and not need to live fearful as a country of another attack?

[Randy W]

 

Maybe it's time for a quiz.

 

Name the countries who arrest and detain their citizens indefinitely without a trial.

The US courts have been doing this for many years in contempt of court cases.

 

 

Indefinitely, no. There are many cases where someone may be thrown in jail on the word of an official. None are indefinite.

 

The alternative to the lawless approach is to follow the existing law. Amend it, if necessary.

[LeeFisher3]

 

Maybe it's time for a quiz.

 

Name the countries who arrest and detain their citizens indefinitely without a trial.

The US courts have been doing this for many years in contempt of court cases.

 

 

Indefinitely, no. There are many cases where someone may be thrown in jail on the word of an official. None are indefinite.

 

The alternative to the lawless approach is to follow the existing law. Amend it, if necessary.

Susan McDougal wondered about the indefinetly part.

[Randy W]

 

Susan McDougal wondered about the indefinetly part.

 

Abuses exist. We are saying they shouldn't.

[Feathers268]

As I have said before I am not thrilled with the law as it stands.

You have to implicitly trust the honesty and integrity of everyone involved in intelligence gathering and our executive branch, which is not a reasonable thing. It only takes one person with an axe to grind to return us to the days of the red scare and McCarthyism or worse.

 

Is someone willing to suggest some comprehensive ideas on how to deal with the issue of the implied threat, yet help to prevent another 9/11 situation on our own soil. The patriot act goes to one extreme and the other seems to be to do nothing.

 

How do we preserve our liberty and freedom and not need to live fearful as a country of another attack?

Simple, get congress to get off their duff and allow the military to set up their court and go to work. But absolutly keep them out of our civil courts.

Or we can pulicly thank them for all of the information they provided and send them back home. I'm sure their terrorist buddies will treat them with loads of respect as they cut off thier heads.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

As I have said before I am not thrilled with the law as it stands.

You have to implicitly trust the honesty and integrity of everyone involved in intelligence gathering and our executive branch, which is not a reasonable thing. It only takes one person with an axe to grind to return us to the days of the red scare and McCarthyism or worse.

 

Is someone willing to suggest some comprehensive ideas on how to deal with the issue of the implied threat, yet help to prevent another 9/11 situation on our own soil. The patriot act goes to one extreme and the other seems to be to do nothing.

 

How do we preserve our liberty and freedom and not need to live fearful as a country of another attack?

Simple, get congress to get off their duff and allow the military to set up their court and go to work. But absolutly keep them out of our civil courts.

Or we can pulicly thank them for all of the information they provided and send them back home. I'm sure their terrorist buddies will treat them with loads of respect as they cut off thier heads.

 

Indeed, there are problems with any system where government is involved. The bigger it gets, the more chance for error and corruption. Still, there is no better method on earth to provide for the soverenity of any nation than its government. While the American public and Congress see the immigration issue staring them in the face, little to nothing will be done to spend the money that will provide the fences and manpower needed to deport and esure the sanctity of US borders. Unfortunately it will likely take a catostrophic event to wake up the big machine to do something. The US is becoming a third-world nation, rapidly heading for anarchy. Sorry, sad, and true.

[toy_rn65]

The current appears to exempt US citizens, but the term 'foreigners' is a little ambiguous. After all, foreigners do become naturalized citizens. Are green card holders exempt? HB-1 holders? Students? It's not clear to me where that line is drawn. Once the ball gets rolling and we hear how many threats have been removed, how long will it be until it also applies to citizens? Remember Timothy McVey?

 

Bill Lets U.S. Citizens Be Held as Enemy Combatants

 

Former White House lawyer Bradford Berenson says the new detainee bill is consistent with what courts have said about the president's right to imprison U.S. citizens as enemy combatants.

 

Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, says the legislation offers U.S. citizens little protection beyond the ability to challenge their appeal. Under the bill, he says, "This administration can simply pick up American citizens and hold them."

 

Maybe it's time for a quiz.

 

Name the countries who arrest and detain their citizens indefinitely without a trial.

 

IMHO, I think this quiz can be best answered by our SOs who have spent the last 30-40 years in China!