Subject:
|
Re: So now it's official...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 03:41:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
153 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/26/national/26CONG.html
>
> Glad I'm not an immigrant in the US:
>
> "For example, it denied the administration the power to detain indefinitely and
> without charges immigrants suspected of involvement in terrorism. The bill does
> expand the limit to seven days of detention, from two days, though under some
> circumstances that could be repeatedly extended by six-month periods."
This is only new in that it can be used to detain people
who have otherwise legitimate papers. If you're found to be
somehow suspect or in violation of your visa, you already
*can* and often *are* detained without trial indefinitely,
in conditions that have been roundly condemned by human-rights
organizations around the world.
I have a feeling these facilities are about to be "expanded."
However, what about the countries of origin of those detainees?
Are we to expect acquiescence on all cases?
LFB
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: So now it's official...
|
| (...) and (...) does (...) That's a big change IMO. And indefinitely "under some circumstances". But that was only an example - the bill contains many other changes as well. ROSCO (23 years ago, 26-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | So now it's official...
|
| (URL) I'm not an immigrant in the US: "For example, it denied the administration the power to detain indefinitely and without charges immigrants suspected of involvement in terrorism. The bill does expand the limit to seven days of detention, from (...) (23 years ago, 26-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
