A Detention Bill You Ought to Read More Carefully (permits indefinite detention of U.S. citizens)

The Atlantic ^ | 2010-03-05 | Marc Ambinder

[rabscuttle385]

Why is the national security community treating the "Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010," introduced by Sens. John McCain and Joseph Lieberman on Thursday as a standard proposal, as a simple response to the administration's choices in the aftermath of the Christmas Day bombing attempt? A close reading of the bill suggests it would allow the U.S. military to detain U.S. citizens without trial indefinitely in the U.S. based on suspected activity. Read the bill here.

[meyer]

I wonder if the PROGRESSIVES have got a re-education camp somewhere that’s big enough to hold the TeaPartiers?

It's going to take a pretty big group of armed thugs to round up the tea partiers. I predict failure if they try that!

[BufordP]

Damn thing has 9 cosponsors already

[fullchroma]

Damn thing has 9 cosponsors already:

Sen Brown, Scott P. [MA] - 3/4/2010
Sen Chambliss, Saxby [GA] - 3/4/2010
Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK] - 3/4/2010
Sen LeMieux, George S. [FL] - 3/4/2010
Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [CT] - 3/4/2010
Sen Sessions, Jeff [AL] - 3/4/2010
Sen Thune, John [SD] - 3/5/2010
Sen Vitter, David [LA] - 3/4/2010
Sen Wicker, Roger F. [MS] - 3/4/2010

[VeniVidiVici]

First reading looks fine to me. They want to make sure an “unprivileged enemy belligerent” is not afforded constitutional protections. They seem to be setting a time limit of 48hrs for such a determination to be made. They can already hold somebody for 24hrs without a reason why, right?

Or are we just trusting the far-right publication the Atlantic to report this and basing comments on that?

[xdem]

Whats' the solution?

1) Money
2) Votes
3) Stop expecting liberal progressives to be intellectually honest about contentious issues.

Winning is their priority. It must become ours.

[rawcatslyentist]

Do you mean they’re getting their ducks in a row over there?

[HiTech RedNeck]

A number of Republicans made similar comments about powerful measures that Bush instituted, wondering what would happen when these measures get into the hands of Democrats. Surely you’d think these lefties would in turn be wondering what would happen to them, if the tea party movement prevails and we get an ascendant newly conservative GOP.

[1ofmanyfree]

How about using it for userpers and traitors in high office?

[Old Flat Toad]

LOC doesn’t have the text yet. It’s S-3081.

From your link to the Atlantic-
2. Criteria for designation of individuals as high value detainees-
E. Such other matters as the President considers appropriate.

Looks like a hand over of power to me.

[Windflier]

Palin truly needs to reconsider supporting flaming socialist McAmnesty.

I think that after McCain's latest Senate bid is over, Sarah will feel cleansed of all moral obligations to him, and will put some mileage between herself and him.

[radu]

Scary stuff!!!! The language is loose enough to cover ANYone they want to consider an enemy as falling under this garbage if it passes. Seeing as how the Left have already called tea partiers “domestic terrorists”, this is truly dangerous.

[matthew fuller]

If Inhofe is for this bill, I’m not gonna lose any sleep over it.

[thesearethetimes...]

From the bill -

SEC. 5. DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL OF UNPRIVILEGED
11 ENEMY BELLIGERENTS.
12 An individual, including a citizen of the United
13 States, determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent
14 under section 3(c)(2) in a manner which satisfies Article
15 5 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of
16 Prisoners of War may be detained without criminal
17 charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities
18 against the United States or its coalition partners in which
19 the individual has engaged, or which the individual has
20 purposely and materially supported, consistent with the
21 law of war and any authorization for the use of military
22 force provided by Congress pertaining to such hostilities.”

Seems to be quite open to interpretation. Also, I don’t have it copied and pasted, but way too many details are left up to the discretion, and definition of “The President”.... and somehow, considering that Tea Partiers have been described as “extremist” by the current administration, I am not feeling real good about leaving the specifics up to THIS President : /

Tatt

[Man50D]

I think that after McCain's latest Senate bid is over, Sarah will feel cleansed of all moral obligations to him, and will put some mileage between herself and him.

She doesn't owe him a thing. McAmnesty was considering LIEberman for his running mate before the OP(formerly the GOP) told him to reconsider. Party over principle is not a moral attribute.

[Ben Ficklin]

Does this apply to all the “belligerents” at FR, such as yourself?

[AuntB]

CBS just annoys me to no end. Today they have Lindsey Graham on the Sunday show. For CBS there are only 2 republicans, Graham or McStain.

[AuntB]

“Does this apply to all the “belligerents” at FR, such as yourself? “

You’d just love that wouldn’t you?
On the McCain bandwagon, Ben, hoping for amnesty??

[Windflier]

She doesn't owe him a thing.

That may be true for you, but it obviously isn't true for Sarah.

Lots of us dislike McCain to such a degree, that we would have been pleased if Sarah had withheld her support. But we're in the minority. Most Americans would have seen that as a moral failure on her part.

[Balding_Eagle]

Careful, you’ll hurt your head. You’re on a mission that has no chance of success.

[Windflier]

Are you a failed missionaire?