News: New assault on citizens' rights in US

Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

Zedicus

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2003
Messages
1,976
Location
Idaho
http://www.mrt.com.mk/en//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1297&Itemid=26

New assault on citizens' rights in US
Monday, 16 October 2006

US President George Bush on Tuesday will sign into law Congress's new terror-detainee legislation, known as Military Commissions Act, which limits the rights of American citizens.
US media say the controversial bill grants the law enforcement officials more power to detain citizens without tangible accusation. The law foresees arrest of individuals seen as potential threat to national security.

The new legislation, passed by the Congress with 57 percent of votes in favor, will enter into affect on Tuesday, once President Bush signs it into law.

The controversial bill will additionally imitate the citizens' rights in America, which have been already jeopardized in the recent years due to enforcement of other inappropriate bills, American media said.
Click to expand...

Emphasis Added

How does this have anything to do with Guns?

Take This part for Example

the controversial bill grants the law enforcement officials more power to detain citizens without tangible accusation. The law foresees arrest of individuals seen as potential threat to national security.
Click to expand...

and imagine what a Rabidly Anti-2A Administration could do to Gun owners with it...:fire:
 
I agree. I myself despise (sp?) Bush, but thats just my opinion. I think he will go down as the worst president in history.


Well, if you guys are white, and conservative, then you're safe. Its the minority races that will be targeted.
 
I agree. I myself despise (sp?) Bush, but thats just my opinion. I think he will go down as the worst president in history.

Well, if you guys are white, and conservative, then you're safe. Its the minority races that will be targeted.
Click to expand...

DerringerUser, as is so often the case, I must ask - what in the world are you talking about? :scrutiny:
 
Well, if you guys are white, and conservative, then you're safe. Its the minority races that will be targeted.
Click to expand...

You're right, I'll be safe. My girlfriend however, will be targetted. :mad:

What Derringeruser is saying is: Most anti gun laws are aimed at minorities. This bill, while not specifically gun-related, will likely be aimed at minorities also.
 
Those of you worried about a racial angle should get out more. The less we focus on race, the closer we will come to the day that it no longer matters. I don't know if that day will actually come, but I think we can get closer.
 
Quote:
‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions

‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by military commission under this chapter."

Stange, but I can't find anything dealing with US citizens in the Military Commissions Act.
Click to expand...

What about this?

Sec. 950fff. Wrongfully aiding the enemy

`Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct.

Since it would be highly unlikely for a foreigner to have "an allegience or duty to the United States", who the heck do you think they are talking about here?
 
What Derringeruser is saying is: Most anti gun laws are aimed at minorities. This bill, while not specifically gun-related, will likely be aimed at minorities also.
Click to expand...

Funny that people are suprised about this. I dont know how many posts I've read on this board where people advocate the profiling of Arabs could they might possibly be potential terrorists. Stuff like this passes because people want it.. Sad :(
 
Consider the situation of.....

This law could be used or "abused" in this manner:

An individual embarrasses a Law enforment agency for severe incompitence, and then the individual documents the following cover up and threats and intimidation.....It is found later that the information provided by the individual has the power to put into question thousands of convictions.

Is that individual going to be considered a "biligierent" under that law?

Will this new power be used by ATF to pound on some of us?

I am concerned about any "re-inturpretation" by ATF management being used to inflict unsanctioned punishment on any individual, as the ATF HAS with other laws in the past to myself.

Just a thought....


Len
 
When do we feed the hogs? I think the time is getting close.

Its things like this that make me doubt we will exist as a FREE nation for much longer. 20 years? 30 years? or even 10 years?
 
4t5, did you miss this part?
Any person subject to this chapter
Click to expand...
Who's subject to the chapter?



crazed ss said:
Funny that people are suprised about this. I dont know how many posts I've read on this board where people advocate the profiling of Arabs could they might possibly be potential terrorists. Stuff like this passes because people want it..
Click to expand...
So, law enforcement should just leave out an important part of a profile (race), so that minorities will not be "targeted"? That is what is known as "political correctness run amok."




Historic Arms, why would a law against aiding terrorists be used to target whistle-blowers? If they're willing to stretch things that far, they could just as easily slap you with anything else.
 
So, law enforcement should just leave out an important part of a profile (race), so that minorities will not be "targeted"? That is what is known as "political correctness run amok."
Click to expand...

If a crime has been comitted and the cops have a profile/description of a possible suspect then it makes sense to focus on the race of the people who meet that description. If no crime has been committed, then the cops shouldnt target people on the basis of race.

It's interesting how people never seem to care about rights when it's other people who are being violated.
 
It's interesting how people throw out vague accusations to muddy the waters. Proper profiling (including race if necessary), properly done, violates no one's rights. If it did, I wouldn't support it.
 
crazed_ss said:
If a crime has been comitted and the cops have a profile/description of a possible suspect then it makes sense to focus on the race of the people who meet that description. If no crime has been committed, then the cops shouldnt target people on the basis of race.
Click to expand...

Gotta agree 100%. What do the "Shoe Bomber", the "Unabomer", and the "Alfred P. Murrah Building bomber" all have in common? If the only people that come under scrutiny are those of obvious Arab descent, we're leaving out a vast majority of potential criminals and terrorists.
 
Sec. 950fff. Wrongfully aiding the enemy

`Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm confused. I thought treason was already outlined in the Constitution, and didn't include a military tribunal. Are they referring to Americans caught on a foreign battlefield? Need more specifics.
 
4t5 said:
What about this?

Sec. 950fff. Wrongfully aiding the enemy

`Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct.

Since it would be highly unlikely for a foreigner to have "an allegience or duty to the United States", who the heck do you think they are talking about here?
Click to expand...

I would imagine that means military personel or a sworn ally.

Then again, almost all public school students are forced to "Pledge allegiance to the flag. . ." once a day for 13 years. . .


What bothers me most about this whole thing is that no one is focusing on the word co-belligerents. What a great word! Did they just make that up?

Me said:
My buddy and I went out drinking last night. I got belligerant and my buddy was my co-belligerent.
Click to expand...
 
If the only people that come under scrutiny are those of obvious Arab descent, we're leaving out...potential criminals and terrorists.
Click to expand...
True, if we ONLY focus on those who fit a profile.

Then again, almost all public school students are forced to "Pledge allegiance to the flag. . ." once a day for 13 years. . .
Click to expand...
I don't think that's true anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top