This Is Scary!

[budlover13]

Okay...so PLEASE post the TEXT FROM THE BILL that clearly presents evidence supporting your claim.

My sticking point is the basis of what "alleged" or "suspected of".

If one were to review case law, they/i might be inclined to believe that citizenship does not protect them from the provision of being an enemy combatant.

 

[The Ruiner]

My sticking point is the basis of what "alleged" or "suspected of".

If one were to review case law, they/i might be inclined to believe that citizenship does not protect them from the provision of being an enemy combatant.

those words DO NOT APPEAR in the bill....Cite the TEXT FROM THE BILL PLEASE for the love of god....

A "sticking point" might as well be an admittance that you have nothing worth arguing against actual evidence.

 

[The Ruiner]

sounds more like an assumption on your part. Is it such a bad thing to just review the bill and have a real conversation about it?

 

[OGEvilgenius]

So...if you read the bill you would have seen...



Like what's in the bill, and I have repeated numerous times here: If you are NOT a member of Al Qaeda, and live IN the US, this bill does not apply to you, and it CANNOT apply to you.

However, if you are a terrorist, living outside the US, regardless of citizenship, and are planning attacks or providing support to terrorist...then you should worry.

Just read the damn bill, don't just pretend.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:6:./temp/~c112JVBTOl:e578148

That is a link to the text of the sections in question. Just friggin read it already.

You have to look at it in context.

There is a section that requires (ie: FORCES the military to obey orders) the military to hold terrorist suspects (I forget the exact definition, but it's in there) indefinitely. All that section does is make so the military doesn't HAVE to keep people indefinitely if they are American.

This is hardly reassuring or effective or anything close to what you think it is.

 

[The Ruiner]

You have to look at it in context.

There is a section that requires (ie: FORCES the military to obey orders) the military to hold terrorist suspects (I forget the exact definition, but it's in there) indefinitely. All that section does is make so the military doesn't HAVE to keep people indefinitely if they are American.

This is hardly reassuring or effective or anything close to what you think it is.

Well, find the text...present your case, effectively, without the use of rhetoric.

 

[The Ruiner]

I'm still waiting...