It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by marg6043
My mistake that was the patriot act I
SECTION 501 (Expatriation of Terrorists) expands the Bush administration's "enemy combatant" definition to all American citizens who "may" have violated any provision of Section 802 of the first Patriot Act. (Section 802 is the new definition of domestic terrorism, and the definition is "any action that endangers human life that is a violation of any Federal or State law.") Section 501 of the second Patriot Act directly connects to Section 125 of the same act. The Justice Department boldly claims that the incredibly broad Section 802 of the First USA Patriot Act isn't broad enough and that a new, unlimited definition of terrorism is needed.
Under Section 501 a US citizen engaging in lawful activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen again. The Justice Department states that they can do this because the person "had inferred from conduct" that they were not a US citizen. Remember Section 802 of the First USA Patriot Act states that any violation of Federal or State law can result in the "enemy combatant" terrorist designation.
Patriot act 2 2003
www.rickieleejones.com...
Originally posted by marg6043
"Enemy combatant" is a general category that subsumes two sub-categories: lawful and unlawful combatants. See Quirin, 317 U.S. at 37-38. Lawful combatants receive prisoner of war (POW) status and the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. Unlawful combatants do not receive POW status and do not receive the full protections of the Third Geneva Convention.
Now tell me how many of the captured prisoners in US secret camps that has been tagged enemy combatants have Geneva convention rights.
Actually all the prisoners US is taking are called Unlawful combatants.
BTW with the new bill signed today The president give himself the rights to chose punishment for the detainees.
Originally posted by etshrtslr
Wrong again - show me the statute that authorizes the Government to charge US citizens as enemy combatants and then strip them of their Constitutional rights....Show me the Statute.
Its not about authorization.....its about the fact the govt can accuse someone of commiting any type of crime call it terrorism then deem the accused any enemy combatant....its at this point rights are lost.....of course there is not going to be explicit language in the statue saying all americans can be charged as enemy combatants.....you have to be deemed a terrorist first and they can do that by labeling any crime terrorism.
Please see my previous post - Marg is citing Patriot Act II which in not law.
Originally posted by Vekar
Anyone who goes in will do the exact same things as have been done and nothing will change, it will get worse.
Originally posted by etshrtslr
Please see my previous post - Marg is citing Patriot Act II which in not law.
I did read your post.....Please read my post....If an american citizen is accused of commiting an act of terrorism the accused can then be deemed any enemy combatant with the resulting loss of constitutional protection.
I dont know how else to say you are incorrect.
José Padilla (also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir) (born October 18, 1970) is a U.S. citizen of Puerto Rican descent accused of being a terrorist by the United States government. He was arrested in Chicago on May 8, 2002, and remains in detention in a military prison. For the first three years of his detention he was held without charge; he is now charged with "conspiracy to murder, kidnap, and maim people overseas."
en.wikipedia.org...
The U.S. administration has in the past described him as an illegal enemy combatant, arguing that he was thereby not entitled to the normal protection of US law, nor protection under the Geneva Convention.
Originally posted by etshrtslr
I dont know how else to say you are incorrect.
José Padilla (also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir) (born October 18, 1970) is a U.S. citizen of Puerto Rican descent accused of being a terrorist by the United States government. He was arrested in Chicago on May 8, 2002, and remains in detention in a military prison. For the first three years of his detention he was held without charge; he is now charged with "conspiracy to murder, kidnap, and maim people overseas."
en.wikipedia.org...
The U.S. administration has in the past described him as an illegal enemy combatant, arguing that he was thereby not entitled to the normal protection of US law, nor protection under the Geneva Convention.
I dont know how I can be wrong its happened already.....They accuse you of terrorism then deem you any enemy combatant and your constitutional rights are lost.
[edit on 17-10-2006 by etshrtslr]
A man who allegedly shot a crossbow at a motorist after being on the receiving end of an obscene gesture has been charged with committing a terroristic act.
Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes triable by military commissions - includes the following definition.
"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."
The supreme court ruled on this
Originally posted by darkbluesky
Sorry if some of my posts were un-neccessarily abrasive. I tend to get over-reved on this topic.
Originally posted by Vitchilo
Here's an example of how an american citizen who just did a road rage act is now accused as a terrorist... Source
A man who allegedly shot a crossbow at a motorist after being on the receiving end of an obscene gesture has been charged with committing a terroristic act.
Some quotes from the Military Comission Act...
Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes triable by military commissions - includes the following definition.
"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."
So anyone who breach allegiance (supporting Bush) or duty (draft) is a terrorist... so it doesn't appply to US citizens? Yeah right.
Also there's an article about North Korea, the OPLAN 5027 and the draft... You could be interested in reading it...
Originally posted by dgtempe
For those who still think there will be an election, there might be a mock one, but that's all.
This man will find the way to stay in power, which is exactly why he's coming up with all this. He's not going anywhere.
For those of you who live under the delussion that all will be fine, i got news for you. It wont.
Originally posted by etshrtslr
The supreme court ruled on this
Can you show me where the supreme court ever ruled on this or even heard the case?
Dennis Kucinich speaking from the Floor of the House
"The second point: H.R. 6166 and S. 3930 cast a wide net, in defining unlawful enemy combatants, that would include any American supporter of a national liberation movement which is seeking to overthrow a US Government-supported despot.
"For instance, with such a loose definition, the thousands of Americans, many of whom are church clergy, who provided support to the armed and unarmed opposition to the deposed dictatorships of El Salvador and Nicaragua, could have been designated as unlawful enemycombatants.