Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

The Doctor.

(17,266 posts)

5. Hey, thanks. Not sure of a couple things though:

Reply to cthulu2016 (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 27, 2011, 07:12 PM

Dec 2011

How is the determination of 'aiding Al Qaeda' made?

If it doesn't change existing law about the capture of people on US soil, then that would obviously not supercede current laws.

If the bill has a big enough hole that allows for indefinite detention merely by the accusation of 'aiding AQ' without the opportunity to prove otherwise or require evidence, then it's obviously something that needs to be closed.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"Where in This Bill does it Grant Authority to Indefinitely Detain US Citizens?" [View all] The Doctor. Dec 2011 OP

k&r for answers...nt wildbilln864 Dec 2011 #1

K&R silverweb Dec 2011 #2

I'd like to say that the admittedly Libertarian Jonathan Turley is entirely objective, The Doctor. Dec 2011 #4

It does, but it is fair to debate how meaningful that is cthulu2016 Dec 2011 #3

Hey, thanks. Not sure of a couple things though: The Doctor. Dec 2011 #5

I believe that is a military or executive determination but I'm always subject to factual correction cthulu2016 Dec 2011 #6

re: your second observation cthulu2016 Dec 2011 #7

if it doesn't explicitly exclude judicial review qazplm Dec 2011 #9

I should have said judicial process or oversight. My bad. cthulu2016 Dec 2011 #13

I wonder about who does the deciding Mojorabbit Dec 2011 #14

Congress would have to declare war on environmentalism first cthulu2016 Dec 2011 #16

usually when a law qazplm Dec 2011 #8

Ahhhh... see what you said there? cthulu2016 Dec 2011 #15

Whipping out the tinfoil fedora for a mo'... The Doctor. Dec 2011 #17

It codifies judicial decisions zipplewrath Dec 2011 #10

That's a novel piece of theory. The Doctor. Dec 2011 #18

It's fairly straight forward zipplewrath Dec 2011 #21

But "Further Appeals to Higher Courts" On the Road Dec 2011 #19

It would be about the intent of congress zipplewrath Dec 2011 #20

K&R patrice Dec 2011 #11

K&R great white snark Dec 2011 #12