Feinstein Amendment Further Entrenches Power of Military Indefinite Detention

I'm always having a good day, BigTurdLittleMan. LL has chosen to be an idiot statist. That's his problem, not mine. You guys seem to like total government control. I don't. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

LL handed you your ass, and in typical fashion, when you are beaten, you call names and avoid answering questions that require detail and proof.

You got nothin do ya?

LL handed me nothing. He simply exposed himself to be as ignorant as the most ignorant on this board, and a supporter of totalitarian tactics, like you. Think what you want. Like I need to impress you.

I was honestly caught off guard. I thought LL was smarter than he apparently is. That was the "gotcha" - nothing else.

Those rights only arise in criminal cases, LL. You don't have them in a civil court. The irony is that the right to counsel arises because your liberty is in jeopardy. In a civil court, they can't take away your liberty. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

There is NO right to counsel in a civil case that I know of. Some states may be different, but I do not know of any, and it certainly isn't nationwide. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Actually, here is a compendium of state laws concerning rights to counsel in civil cases. They pertain mainly to indigent defendents and family law situations.

None of these apply to cases which could arise under the NDAA. That's what I was talking about. Hell, I was an appointed attorney in civil juvenile court. I know what goes on there.

What we are talking about here are people indefinitely detained under the NDAA. There is no right to counsel in those cases. Just as there is no right to counsel if CitiBank sues you, or other such cases. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yes, I knew there were certain circumstances where an individual has a right to counsel in a civil case. I've been appointed in some of those cases. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You don't have Miranda rights in a civilian court? You don't even have the right to contact your family to let them know you're detained!! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Which is it?

Miranda rights in ONLY criminal courts?
Miranda rights in civil AND criminal courts?
OR do you have "Miranda rights" BEFORE going to Court?

Why is it that you cannot provide me with a section number in the 2013 Act?

I can imagine that it is tough to sit there without any ass left, ...

.... but at least give me a section # so I can hand you what's left of it!!!!

You seem to know so much about it, find it and explain it to me. Actually, it hasn't passed both Houses yet, and hasn't been signed. But it will be, and then you can educate me. That should be fun. But please re-read the Feinstein Amendment and the related analysis.

And what the hell is your point about Miranda? Once you become a suspect, or are arrested, you are entitled to your Miranda rights, as decided by the SCOTUS in Miranda v. Arizona. The NDAA allows you to be detained indefinitely without Miranda. Hopefully, once it gets to the SCOTUS, that nonsense will be overturned.

Do you even have a point? I think someone pissed on your cornflakes, and you haven't gotten over it.

Do you even have a point? I think someone pissed on your cornflakes, and you haven't gotten over it. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

When someone starts talking to themselves, like this, it is a sign of implosion.

As you have morphed from your original hysterical post based on an equally hysterical op-ed article, you have finally concluded ...

"Hopefully, once it gets to the SCOTUS, that nonsense will be overturned."

Do you mean the "nonsense" of claiming that one lacks Miranda warnings in court?

When you (and you are not alone) latch on to misguided hysterical theories and then attempt to tailor them into some political agenda or "cause," like you have done based on misinformation and misinterpretation, it is tantamount to the ..

Heller Keller school of mountain climbing.

You have flown off the handle about ... nothing ... with nothing to support your nothing ... and now you ask ME ...

"Do you even have a point?"

Well ... in fact I do .... you are a self-aggrandized ... retread .... attempting to appear intellectually superior, when challenged, which is apparently not characteristic of your pre-selected circle of acquaintenances, attacks those who question your evaluative skills by ...

childish name-calling, revamping your pronouncements of fact to fit reality, and resorting to mindless snippits in an effort to refocus the discussion YOU STARTED onto someone else in an attempt to get out of the "hot lights" you turned on yourself.

But not to worry ... COG .... after looking the mirror ...

..... take a look at some piling on now.

You are an internet chameleon who re-shades in an attempt to blend in to the truth as it is slowly revealed after you make such an hysterical thread ... that it makes you appear to be as uninformed as the journalist you are quoting and posting as your authtority.

But the exercise would be instructional to you, if it were not for your ego, since you have through that morphing process actually concluded ....

"Hopefully, once it gets to the SCOTUS, that nonsense will be overturned."

Which by the way, makes the following "nonsense" ...

"But for those of you who would like to remain free, another amendment has passed that will further entrench the power of the government to detain you without due process." .. COF Post #1.

that old dude can piss off even the gentlest of souls, eh, LL?

LMAO

Whatever, LL. Rant all you want. If you are detained pursuant to the NDAA, you have no rights. Not to an attorney, not to Miranda, not to a jury, nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. And you can be detained for as long as the government wants to detain you. Still with no rights. You don't even get to tell your family where you are. You will just disappear.

I kind of think that is wrong.

Now, if you want, go play "gotcha" with yourself. It's obvious you spend lots of time alone.

that old dude can piss off even the gentlest of souls, eh, LL? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

YR, if you are speaking of me, I'm not pissed off.

For a substantial period of time I have made a pretty decent living off ignorant, know-it-alls like COF and some other posters on here.*

As the saying goes: "It's an ill-wind that blows no good."


As for COF, the appropriate saying is:

"You can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."





* And that ain't why I'm on here, trust me.

If you're making a living off of mental midgetry, then you've come to the right place. I just enjoy seeing someone shouldering the "burden of pouf" with the Unawhiner.

If you're making a living off of mental midgetry, .... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

It's the ones who believe they are giants that create gainful employment.

But ....
.. it has been my theory for quite some time that the founding fathers, as they were sitting around the table, and had just crafted the First Amendment, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ...

.... realized that when they gave folks like COF the "green light" in Amendment One ....

they thought perhaps we should remind them that .....

... they don't HAVE to speak!!!! So they crafted the 5th one.

Once realizing that folks like COF will speak anyway ... they quickly

devised the 6th so they might be able to undo that which they had done by

over-exercising their "right" in the 1st one and ignoring the 5th one.

As for "coming here" for a "living" ....

.... I'm still looking for a hobby that earns more of a living, and ....

... this is not one. This is enterainment and mental calisthenics, sometimes.

LOL! You guys are TOO funny! You twist, distort and take my comments out of context, argue with them, actually arguing with yourselves, and not me, then you fall all over yourselves patting yourselves on the back about how you "got" me. You've posted nothing germane to the OP, but have gone off topic, and somehow think you've outsmarted me. You aren't even close. But go ahead, feel good about yourselves. It's apparent you have very little else going for you. And I don't care. Anyone who looks at this thread objectively will see what I mean.

This is why I like posting here. Know it alls pretending they defeated a know it all, when they know nothing at all. This is VERY entertaining and funny!

Knock yourself out. I made my point. You two can have your little love affair, while I go on to exposing more lies hidden by your government. Then I'll watch you defend by distorting and twisting, rather than addressing the real issue.

LL, you weren't predictable before, but you are now. This will be fun. Enjoy yourselves, I certainly will.

LOL! You guys are TOO funny! You twist, distort and take my comments out of context, ..... I made my point. ...... Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Here is your "point" ... since you have been so "reluctant" to disclose the TRUTH ...

Feinstein Amendment (NDAA 2013 § 1031):
“(e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”

Not here is the “scary part” …. (Not Feinstein's):

“(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.”

Now, "chicken little" (COF) ....

... Take the Dastardly Deed Amendment and insert ..... "Miranda" like this ....


“(e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect MIRANDA, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”

whew ...

roflmao

I stand by my OP. I trust their analysis more than yours, LL. You have aligned yourself with the Obamatons. 'Nuff said.

I stand by my OP. I trust their analysis more than yours, LL. You have aligned yourself with the Obamatons. 'Nuff said. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

There you have it folks, StupidOldFart has made the decision to "trust" his OP's analysis. Facts be damned!