Quote:
Originally Posted by Failed
The scary part: do they only have to sign off once and that's it, all Americans, at anytime, can now be detained indefinitely by the military? It doesn't say, and if it's a bill with such power, I think it should clarify such things. I'm sure that's what draws the most concern from people, is the lack of specifics and the wording which could lead to a massive abuse of power.
Here is a link to the pdf of the bill: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...12s1867pcs.pdf
It's 682 pages long. The parts that are of concern in this matter begin on page 359. Sec 1031, 1032, and 1033. Page 359 is the beginning of Sec 1031.
If you really read and make note of which sections and paragraphs apply to other sections and paragraphs you may be able to understand the document and why people are so concerned. It also apparently draws regulations from other documents, which are referenced, and makes it even more challenging to truly understand. |
Yeah perhaps it should be more clear how broad a waiver can be. Perhaps each waiver needs to list the name or names of the people they want to question, so it's clear they can't get a waiver for "terrorism suspects" or similar.
I hate it when bills are real complex, with lots of cross references, so it's hard to understand. Most, especially at the state level, really aren't that difficult so it surprises me that so many people argue about them without ever reading them. Perhaps they believe Pelosi "we have to pass the bill to see what's in it."
__________________
For historical display only. This information is not current:
support@bettercgi.com ICQ 7208627
Strongbox - The next generation in site security
Throttlebox - The next generation in bandwidth control
Clonebox - Backup and disaster recovery on steroids