Skip to main content

View Diary: Senate passes defense authorization (197 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There is nothing hysterical about opposition to (8+ / 0-)

    this travesty of justice.  There are no vague, fine lines to cross here.  This is the Rubicon.  There is no going back.  It doesn't matter whether the language of the bill can be interpreted in some positive way.  Another President will interpret it differently.  And, when you don't have the right to a lawyer, a judge, or a trial by jury of your peers, you won't have a say in the matter.  You won't be able to disagree and tell them that they are using the law the wrong way.  You will just be in a dark hole, and nobody will know where you are.  You won't have a bail amount because there won't be any bail.

    Our Founding Fathers didn't spill their blood for this shit to happen.

    #OccupyOMC - "We have a permit, its called The Constitution".

    by Evolutionary on Thu Dec 15, 2011 at 02:45:13 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The bill isn't vague, it's QUITE (0+ / 0-)

      specific: it does not apply to U.S. Citizens or legal residents who are on U.S. soil.  In that sense, it changes absolutely nothing about existing policy and practice, and certainly does not enable the indefinite, Unconstitutional detention people are claiming.  THAT is definitely hysterics.

      As GW Bush showed, you don't NEED anything in writing like this to engage in indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, etc.  So this is no "Rubicon," it's what has been happening for a long time now.  

      •  The president still has discretion. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Evolutionary

        The only thing that doesn't apply to US citizens on OUR soil is internment by the military.

        The military can still grab you and hand you over to police who will put you in a for-profit debtors prison if the President decides you present a clear danger or are helping terrorists.  By doing things like not spending enough or calling politicians scumbag bribe takers.

      •  So the next time I cross into Canada or Mexico in (0+ / 0-)

        my car, and my government has labeled me as 'the enemy' for what ever subversive action they deem a threat - I am subject to "extraordinary rendition".  

        It doesn't...fucking...matter... what bits we quibble over.  The point is that we already have extrajudicial punishment occurring, without this new bill, and against every Amendment in the Bill of Rights.  If cops (or "Homeland Security Units") arrest you for any violation of this law - even if you haven't violated it - you don't get a chance to argue the point.  You just get black bagged and you're gone.  No public defender will be appointed to you.  The ACLU will never know about it.  Your family won't know where you are.  You won't be released under any amount of bail.  All under color of "war of law".  A constant state of war exists now.

        Off American soil this law applies to every single one of us.
        Which begs a second question - who, exactly, from the United States Government has the legal right to 'detain' or arrest anyone while in other countries?  That used to be up to those countries, and their cops.  This bill suggests that we can freely abduct citizens of other countries, and indefinitely detain any American Citizens nearby in the process.  This law will be perverted just as so many others has.  It should not exist.  We have laws to punish criminals like terrorists - already.

        #OccupyOMC - "We have a permit, its called The Constitution".

        by Evolutionary on Thu Dec 15, 2011 at 05:40:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  NO. (0+ / 0-)

          The bill does not allow what you described.  It does not apply to U.S. citizens, full stop.  It also does not apply to legal residents while on U.S. soil, but the protection for citizens is everywhere.

          THAT is precisely the hysterical misunderstanding at work here.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site