Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
But for those of you who would like to remain free, another amendment has passed that will further entrench the power of the government to detain you without due process.
From the article:
Sen. Dianne Feinstein has put forward a flawed and dangerous amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013.
What it did was further entrench the power of military indefinite detention and make it more likely the power will be used against immigrants in the United States, even though that has historically been unconstitutional.
How do you exercise that right, since you don't have a right to counsel in a civilian court? You don't have Miranda rights in a civilian court? You don't even have the right to contact your family to let them know you're detained!!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
He's as blind as to what's going on as you are, BigTurd. We'll wait for the final bill.
There has been a lot of talk about Section 1033 of H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2013. Some have been hailing it as bringing habeas corpus and other rights back to the U.S. This clause in the NDAA does nothing to protect our rights.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
Didn't read the analysis, did you. Nope, didn't think so.
|
COG, you have morphed your "chicken little" OP into a discussion of the 2012 legislation, which is currently under review by the 2nd circuit ....., and will more than likely be reviewed by the SCOTUS.....depending on how the 2nd circuit goes with it.
The Feinstein addition to the 2013 NDAA takes care of the "falling sky" because .... as I previously posted ...
"Read the friggin/ ..... "new provision" .... it doesn't "give" anything ... that is a pure fabrication of what Feinstein added to the legislation ...
Feinstein Amendment (NDAA 2013 § 1031):
“(e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”
That language PRESERVES the "existing law or authorities" = MIRANDA!".....
End of previous posting by LL.
Two matters ....
#1: ... those persons taken into custody "in the United States" enjoy the protections of the United States Constitution, which includes the incorporated amendments, i.e. those enumerated withint the Miranda warnings, along with due process and equal protection under "existing law or authorities."
#2:... for whatever reason YOU have attempted to draw some distinction between "civil" courts and "criminal" courts as having something to do with a person's
protections of the United States Constitution, which includes the incorporated amendments, i.e. those enumerated withint the Miranda warnings, along with due process and equal protection .....
and you are simply wrong!
As I posted before regarding your cut and paste and morphed bullshit from some hysterical article about the breadth and scope of Feinstein's amendment ....
I QUOTED and NOT YOU .....
By LL:
"You are an internet chameleon who re-shades in an attempt to blend in to the truth as it is slowly revealed after you make such an hysterical thread ... that it makes you appear to be as uninformed as the journalist you are quoting and posting as your authtority."
You remind me of some of the West Texas ranchers and farmers who opposed daylight savings time, because it would increase the length of the days and burn up their livestock and crops from the intense EXTRA sunlight.
Just a thought ... does it make any difference to you that the folks who kick down your front door have on an Army uniform instead of FBI special weapons and tactics gear?
Just asking.
