The text you read though 100% supports my position and is no different then what is already true for the most part. If you are an American citizen such as the American Taliban fighter in Afghanistan engaged in ‘hostilities’ against America then you have no Constitutional rights in regards to how the military treats you. You are then subject to the laws of war.
Those who have a problem which such laws are acting as the terrorist civil rights movement and are a disgrace, imo. Show me instances of this of any similar law being abused and then I will back up going after those that abused the law but the law itself is Constitutionally sound and a good law.
Actually it’s the text that makes it tyranny. All throughout the rest of that bill the conditions to be detained start with “not an American citizen”. Notice that text doesn’t say anything about that. Also notice the text doesn’t say just fighters, it includes “supporters” and there’s no definition of what support is. And keep in mind this is for detainment without arraignment or trial.
That’s the problem, if you can’t see it then you’re part of the problem. There’s haven’t been similar laws. All versions of this bill prior have excluded American citizens. That’s what the big stink is about, now in this version of the bill any American citizen can be accused of supporting “supporting hostilities” and be detained indefinitely. And no the law itself is NOT Constitutionally sound, show me in the Constitution where it says American citizens can be declared enemy hostiles and detained indefinitely. It’s not a good law, it’s MARTIAL LAW.
Hamdi.