Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Wiz-Nerd
Article One, Section 9, clause 2 United States Constitution "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

Title X, Subtitle D, SEC 1021(a-e) states:SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).

(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

Has Congress just declared that the "War on Terror" constitutes a rebellion or invasion under the Constitution, or have they merely declared that, as usual, they have no respect for the rule of law? Personally, I have no trouble with killing US citizens on the battlefield, nor do I have trouble with lawful trials if they are captured rather than killed. I have a huge problem with subverting the Constitution. Obama disgusts me, as do the vast majority of Congresscritters who failed to read and understand this offensive and unconstitutional bill, or who no longer care if their actions are compatible with the Supreme Law of the Land.

33 posted on 01/01/2012 5:50:31 AM PST by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Pollster1

What constitutes “an associated force”?


41 posted on 01/01/2012 7:06:23 AM PST by Excellence (9/11 was an act of faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson