--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardatrwilliamsdotus" <richard@...> wrote: > > > > raunchydog: > > I don't understand why this bill ever made it > > to the floor of the Senate under Democratic > > leadership... > > > So, why do you suppose the majority of the U.S. > Senate opposed the Udall amendment? >
Wall Street bankers buy politicians to make laws favoring their enrichment and continued theft our pension funds, homes, jobs, infrastructure, industry, schools and anything made in America. The oligarchs have nearly accomplished their long sought goal of establishing a feudal system. All they need now is Senate 1867 to control the surfs, the 99%, if the economy gets so bad people riot in streets for food. > Can you give me one good reason to have a public > trial for someone like Osama bin Laden in downtown > New York City? > Terrorists are criminals. Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist. We gave him a trial and the death penalty in Oklahoma. Before Gitmo we put people on trial. New York City has nothing to do with where we have a trial. > If the U.S. is in a war, why shouldn't Obama just > kill the al Qaeda terrorists over in Pakistan or > send a drone after Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen? > Anwar al-Awlaki was an American citizen. Killing him signaled that the U.S. intended to wage its "War on Terror" anywhere in the world, even in America. The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act removed the military from domestic law enforcement. Senate 1867 will remove the last remnants of it, and allow the military, police and private contractors to join forces to arrest citizens at will. The Desaparecidos of Argentina could happen here. http://www.yendor.com/vanished/ > "Defying a veto threat by President Obama, the > Senate voted Tuesday to give the U.S. military > first crack at holding al Qaeda operatives, even > if they are captured in the U.S. and are American > citizens, and also reaffirmed the policy of > indefinite detention..." > A writ of habeas corpus protects you from indefinite detention. "The Great Writ, is a summons with the force of a court order; it is addressed to the custodian (a prison official for example) and demands that a prisoner be taken before the court, and that the custodian present proof of authority, allowing the court to determine whether the custodian has lawful authority to detain the person. If the custodian does not have authority to detain the prisoner, then he must be released from custody." If Senate 1867 passes, it will completely abandon any pretense of habeas corpus for ANYONE SUSPECTED of terrorism. Suppose for a moment you go through a body scanner at the airport and you forgot that you had a small knife in your pocket you use to peel apples. So you set off alarms and before you know it, you're getting a body cavity search with some guy's gloved hand up your ass. If you object, they pepper spray you, slam you to the cement floor, and cuff you with plastic straps so tight you lose circulation in your arms. The next thing you know you're in jail. Will they let you call your lawyer? No. Will they tell you why you're being detained? No. Will you get a trial? No. Meanwhile, without a warrant they've broken the door to your home, confiscated your computer and discovered code embedded in a porn site that links you to Anwar al-Awlaki. Sayonara sucker, it's water boarding and sexy butt time for you, Buster. Habaeas Corpus? Forget about it. There's no such thing if you're in indefinite detention. > 'Senate defies Obama veto threat in terrorist custody vote' > By Stephen Dinan > The Washington Times, Tuesday, November 29, 2011 > http://tinyurl.com/cnjkstd >
