Posted on 06/13/2017 8:09:12 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Donald Trump’s pick to be FBI director was at the center of a controversial immigrant detentions in the immediate wake of 9/11, when dozens of people were spirited away to maximum security prisons and kept from communicating with their families and lawyers––sometimes for weeks.
A government watchdog report shows Christopher Wray and an associate at the Justice Department directed the Bureau of Prisons to keep detainees from having access to lawyers for as long as possible––a move civil liberties advocates find worrisome, and which casts light on how the man who may soon helm the FBI views the relationship between Constitutional rights and national security.
On September 11, 2001, Wray was working in the Deputy Attorney General’s office in downtown Washington D.C. After the attacks, government lawyers rushed to find what steps they could take to try to forestall any other potential attacks. One of the most controversial moves was by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (a now-defunct agency whose responsibilities were passed on to the Department of Homeland Security). The INS detained more than 700 people who the FBI suspected could have been linked to the 9/11 attacks. According to the watchdog report, issued by the Justice Department’s inspector general in April 2003, almost all were men, mostly from Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan, India, and Yemen. They had all committed some sort of immigration violation, either staying longer than their visas allowed or entering the U.S. illegally.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
It begins to sound like an excellent choice.
While his boss covered the arse/exit of his Saudi pals.
I forget, do the Saudis and their royal milk and apple connoisseurs have a history of due process?
Sure looks that way.
Good. Sounds like we are moving in the right direction.
According to the watchdog report, issued by the Justice Department’s inspector general in April 2003, almost all were men, mostly from Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan, India, and Yemen. They had all committed some sort of immigration violation, either staying longer than their visas allowed or entering the U.S. illegally.
So how the heck were any civil rights violated, if all these people were picked up on immigration violations; if they all were picked up for legal violations????
It's a great story about the wisdom of dealing with AND PROTECTING victims of a major war.
The story is worth googling.
Nowhere does this imply that the rights guaranteed to our citizens, as part of the Bill of Rights, are required to be extended and given to NON-citizens, who may be enemies in disguise. The Constitution is not a suicide pact..................
I misread... detonations.
Good either way.
Meuller needs to be destroyed in the court of public opinion. They’d do it. Alinsky his ass off. Ruin him. Ruin his wife. Ruin his business.
It would be best to do it with anonymous leaks.
Sort of reminds me of the movie “The Seige” made pre-2000.
I like him already.
Precisely
...in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it's protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination.
From “Thomas Jefferson, July 27, 1821, Autobiography Draft Fragment,” page 538
https://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/connections/thomas-jefferson/history3.html
What does this mean?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=former+muslim+women&t=hz&iax=1&ia=videos
If we don't protect their right to unmask the fraud of Islam... then who will?
Too bad sooo sad
From 1776-1778, Jefferson served in the Virginia House of Delegates. In 1779, he was elected governor of Virginia and was reelected in 1780. His autobiography discusses the need in the years following the Declaration of Independence to revise Virginia laws to purge them of the remnants of colonial laws. He proposed a number of revisions to the statutes while in the House and later, as governor, continued his efforts to secure passage of these reforms. The Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom proposed during Jefferson’s tenure in the Assembly and finally passed in 1786 was among his proudest accomplishments. In his autobiography, he explains:
The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason & right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally past; and a singular proposition proved that it’s protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read “” departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion” the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it’s protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination.
From “Thomas Jefferson, July 27, 1821, Autobiography Draft Fragment,” page 538
” in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it’s protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination.”
What do you think that means?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.