| The_vagabond7 said: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s3081/show# It's the Enemy belligerent, interrogation, detention and prosecution act. Catchy name. Sponsored by McCain and Joe Lieberman and has 9 co-sponsors backing it right now.
The bill in essence states that anybody can be arrested anywhere in the world (the US included) if they are percieved as a threat to the US. They can be detained indefinitely without charges, and whether or not he is actually a terrorist is up to the secretary of defense and the attorney general. If they disagree then it is solely up to the president to decide whether or not you get denied habeus corpus. It specifically states that you can detain you as long as they damn well please without criminal trial, or miranda rights.
I REALLY don't understand the modern conservative mindset. Touch our money and you are a fascist nazi leading us down the slippery slope of totalitarianism, but give the government unlimited power to do whatever the hell it wants with your person, it's for our own good. Shouldn't limited government kind of include not being able to arrest you indefinitely without trial because they suspect you might be an enemy of america, or demanding that you prove your citizenship or be arrested because you have an accent? Why is the threat of increasing taxes the worst of all evils, but ACTUAL 1984-esque authoritarianism considered a damn good idea? If you're for small government stop complaining about your taxes and stop giving them unlimited control over its citizens (and the rest of the worlds citizens).
|
That... doesn't appear to be what this law saws at all.
All it really does functionally is remove citizenship from people who join terrorist groups (maybe?) and that the Military gets control of people who are terrorists.
Also... it specifically says they CAN'T arrest you indefinitly... it really doesn't change anything with how we actually handle said people.
Removing citizenship is actually a power the government ALREADY has. This would just "force" the state department's hand in the case of terrorists.
This isn't actually creating any new boardreaching powers... just mandating powers already in existance. So it's not really an authortarian bill, instead you should be argueing that some powers be revoked.
