Domestic Terrorism Question

[n david]

Originally Posted by odooley6985

Please explain

I did with the first part. President Bush wanted to hold terrorist in Gitmo. He was told you can't because POWs are protected by the Geneva Conv. That's when fmr Atty Gen Gonzales helped Bush subvert the GC by labeling them "enemy combatants."

Because of that, precedent was set which has allowed President Obama expand the definition of ECs to now include US Citizens. He signed law last year allowing a US citizen to be detained without representation, for as long as the gov't so wills.

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by n david

I did with the first part. President Bush wanted to hold terrorist in Gitmo. He was told you can't because POWs are protected by the Geneva Conv. That's when fmr Atty Gen Gonzales helped Bush subvert the GC by labeling them "enemy combatants."

Because of that, precedent was set which has allowed President Obama expand the definition of ECs to now include US Citizens. He signed law last year allowing a US citizen to be detained without representation, for as long as the gov't so wills.

i would like to know how enemy combatant is defined by gov plus who has the authority to designate. theoretically any left wing person like jane fonda in vietnam could be designated. very disconcerting. maybe even some right wing neonazi

[n david]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

i would like to know how enemy combatant is defined by gov plus who has the authority to designate. theoretically any left wing person like jane fonda in vietnam could be designated. very disconcerting. maybe even some right wing neonazi

Not just extremists either....Mr. Paul talked about a bulletin sent out to some MO law enforcement agency (MIAC) that listed Libertarians, Christians, Constitutionalists, people with copies of the Constitution, bumper stickers like "Don't Tread on Me" as possible homegrown terrorists or militias.

Basically ANYONE who disagrees with whomever is in the WH, present or future admins, can be classified as an enemy combatant and stripped of 5th, 6th and 8th Amendment rights. This isn't just about Obama, though he's really ramped up the drone issue to an extent I don't even think Bush thought about.

[odooley6985]

Originally Posted by n david

Not just extremists either....Mr. Paul talked about a bulletin sent out to some MO law enforcement agency (MIAC) that listed Libertarians, Christians, Constitutionalists, people with copies of the Constitution, bumper stickers like "Don't Tread on Me" as possible homegrown terrorists or militias.

Basically ANYONE who disagrees with whomever is in the WH, present or future admins, can be classified as an enemy combatant and stripped of 5th, 6th and 8th Amendment rights. This isn't just about Obama, though he's really ramped up the drone issue to an extent I don't even think Bush thought about.

Possible being the key word. Look at John Walk Lindh. He was caught fighting against the US. That is an enemy combatant. Per the legislation you still need a warrant and even with one you still cant use a drone for certain things. Take off the tin foil hat. Let me guess you listen to Alex Jones.

[n david]

Originally Posted by odooley6985

Possible being the key word. Look at John Walk Lindh. He was caught fighting against the US. That is an enemy combatant. Per the legislation you still need a warrant and even with one you still cant use a drone for certain things. Take off the tin foil hat. Let me guess you listen to Alex Jones.

Hahaha, going down in flames, but thanks for playing!

1) JWL was under Bush. As I stated, while the EC label started with Bush, it's been expanded under Obama.

2) By legislation, are you talking about the FAA authorization for the use of drones? Thus far that is the only legislation on drones, and it has nothing to do with what the discussion is currently about.

3) You should read up on the issue of warrant-less surveillance. It happens far more than you think.

4) I'm not wearing a tin foil hat

5) Wrong. I can say absolutely I DO NOT LISTEN TO ALEX JONES! Hahaha. I have never watched his videos or listened to his program. The only time I open an article on his website is by accident when it's an un-sourced link on Drudgereport or in a friends' FB post. I think Alex Jones may have some good points...but he's so over the top that, to me, he comes across as nutty or looney.

[odooley6985]

Originally Posted by n david

Hahaha, going down in flames, but thanks for playing!

1) JWL was under Bush. As I stated, while the EC label started with Bush, it's been expanded under Obama.

2) By legislation, are you talking about the FAA authorization for the use of drones? Thus far that is the only legislation on drones, and it has nothing to do with what the discussion is currently about.

3) You should read up on the issue of warrant-less surveillance. It happens far more than you think.

4) I'm not wearing a tin foil hat

5) Wrong. I can say absolutely I DO NOT LISTEN TO ALEX JONES! Hahaha. I have never watched his videos or listened to his program. The only time I open an article on his website is by accident when it's an un-sourced link on Drudgereport or in a friends' FB post. I think Alex Jones may have some good points...but he's so over the top that, to me, he comes across as nutty or looney.

1-Has the EC label really changed? I dont see it. You are confused cause the US citizen thing is being thrown around. You are thinking that EC and US citizen are being used interchangeably. I dont see it. Again, I bring up the Civil war and Lincoln because it has to do with what we are talking about both the EC label and US citizen label.

[canam]

you mean like ruby ridge ? silly question

[odooley6985]

So basically people are thinking drones will be used to kill US Citizens who disagree with the government. While I think they will be used to kill US citizens who are enemy combatants

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by odooley6985

So basically people are thinking drones will be used to kill US Citizens who disagree with the government. While I think they will be used to kill US citizens who are enemy combatants

the danger is who gets to define and designate as enemy combatant. following the constitution is a safegaurd.

[odooley6985]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

the danger is who gets to define and designate as enemy combatant. following the constitution is a safegaurd.

Right. But people are making it seem like people who peacefully abject to the government are going to be taken out by drones.