S1867 approved by the Senate

Discussion in 'World Events' started by S.A.M., Dec 3, 2011.

  1. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Not sure if anyone is following this, since I didn't see it in WEP, at least in the titles...

    S1867 has now been approved by the Democrat controlled senate.

    What brought this to my attention was a link on facebook

    So, whats going on?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829

    Right
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    Further erosion and reversal of progress in human rights and the rule of law. Continuing on the path to Barbarity and ultraviolence. Dismantling of freedom of speech. Gathering momentum towards authoritarianism and Facism.
    Goodbye to the land of the Free.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,683
    Looks like no big changes, just business as usual, for better or worse.
     
  8. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Nope.

    Sec 1031 is very limited:

    But Sec 1032 clarifies WHO falls under this:

    (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.


    So the net effect of the amendment is simply that if we capture someone, who is not a US citizen (or legal alien) in the US associated with Al Qaeda we can turn him over to the military, not the US court system.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c112:2:./temp/~c112smOzWH::

    Arthur
     
  9. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    what happens if we capture a us citizen?
     
  10. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    A US Citizen, like Padilla, would get tried by the Federal Court system.
     
  11. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    in the current bill does the executive reserve the right to make a waver with regards to the venue a suspect might be tried under?
     
  12. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    So in your opinion... non US citizens can be held without charge, indefinitely and without due legal process, as if that is somehow not barbaric or a reflection of gross human rights abuse?
     
  13. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    Well if strawdog said it then its gotta be right.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    But its suddenly alright when Iran does it?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Of course not, its just that your willing to overlook it in their case. But you don't when the US does it.

    What does that tell everyone else here.
     
  15. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    Tel me friend Fed. Is this topic on human rights abuses in Iran?
     
  16. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    Silly S.A.M...
    We are now in a police state. Of course.
    I've told you we're not really in charge here anymore... do you believe me now?
    ATM I don't think there's a whole lot I can reasonably do about this, but I'm far from happy about it.
    ...At least my attack wife has some ammo.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Might want to get more ammo.
     
  17. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Yes, although apparently the administration is also unhappy with how that process is spelled out in this bill.

    Personally, I'm going to hold off on breaking out my "OMFG POLICE STATE" picket signs until this stuff survives reconciliation with the House version and a veto by Obama. Which it won't, so... it's something to keep an eye on, but the real question is how this stuff will get amended once Obama puts it back on Congress' desk.

    Kinda baffling what the Senate is even thinking here though.
     
  18. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Don't be silly. Iran uses show trials, not indefinite detention.
     
  19. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    I'm less sanguine it will be vetoed.
    The fact that they passed this at all is pretty outrageous anyway.
     
  20. superstring01 Moderator

    Messages:
    12,110
    Exaaaaaactly.

    ~String
     
  21. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    How many votes do they need to override the Presidential veto?

    Yeah but that was already in place:

    How would that help? Whom are you going to fire upon? Apart from the 600 billion dollars that they can use against you, there is also the existing status quo of too many weapons

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    source:http://www.economist.com/blogs/demo...e-spending?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/alwaysmoreorless

    These are not rational people you're dealing with
     
  22. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    2/3 majority (so, 67 in the Senate and 291 in the House).

    But this bill is still in reconciliation - only the Senate has passed it, and it will only make its way to the President's desk after both houses of Congress manage to work out a common version and pass that.
     
  23. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Why? Obama's been very clear that he will veto this. It would be a big embrassment for him to back down.

    Yeah, I'm at something of a loss as to what the Senate was thinking here. I just don't get the motivations.
     

Share This Page