Re: I was taken in handcuffs for photography at the Freeman St Station on the 2 (746080) | |||
Home > SubChat | |||
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
Re: I was taken in handcuffs for photography at the Freeman St Station on the 2 |
|
Posted by Nilet on Wed Feb 18 17:35:51 2009, in response to Re: I was taken in handcuffs for photography at the Freeman St Station on the 2, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 17 18:01:44 2009. Fine, I'll reword my previous example.Tomorrow, US soldiers come to North Dakota, You seem to be playing musical chairs with yourself here— people detained at the whim of the president are "enemy combatants" so the constitution doesn't apply, but not actually enemy combatants, so the Geneva conventions don't apply. What happens on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan (essentially, the "war zone") is one thing. I'm talking about people being detained with no judicial oversight, who were captured in Canada and Germany; possibly, even some in the US. Unless you're saying that Canada, Germany, and the US itself are battlefields, you can leave military scenarios out of it. So, I ask again: Do you believe that there are any circumstances in which it is acceptable to detain someone without judicial oversight? Assuming the US is the country detaining them, is it acceptable to detain somebody without granting them the protections of the US Constitution under any circumstances? Rules and circumstances pertaining to wars don't apply, as the US has not declared war on any other countries, nor has any other country declared was against the US. This refers solely to individuals or groups of individuals who are accused of performing or plotting to perform illegal actions (crimes). |