Guantanamo houses mainly foreign terrorists taken in arms against the United States and its allies. I didn't see anything in the proposed UK law about that. Rather, the UK plan seems to concentrate on domestic criminals and anti-social types who might pose a threat in the future. So it's not really a valid comparison.

we have 10 "escape & evasion" prison camps across this country already and FEMA is building 10 more at this time, for "emergency relocation/evacuation" purposes.

No one has come forward as a witness that the E&E camps are actually training troops, as yet!!!???

It has never been far fetched. This proposal is a very tiny leap away from being about "enemies of the state", "thought criminals", "state traitors", etc. Now we just talk about doing it because they MIGHT be a danger.

Wildman I've read the same claims and I've had the same thought running through my head for 18 months- why didn't they put the Katrina refugees into these relocation facilities?

Fortunately the U.S. has not slid that far down the slope yet. What you are referring to are known as "ex post facto" laws and thankfully they are still considered unconstitutional in this country (at least for now). If it was legal when you did it but is made illegal after the fact, you cannot constitutionally be charged with violating the law for your earlier action.

i don't know, but i can think of several reasons!

Does the system of Presidential Executive orders have any democratic oversight from the Congress or Senate?
The executive order, which is currently in place, which created the Federal Emergency Management Agency appears to already have much more severe powers than anything that can be implemented let alone thought about by even the most Machiavellian politician here in the UK.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12148.html#

The subsidiary Presidential Executive Orders E.O. 10998, E.O. 10999, E.O. 11000 are already currently US law.

They appear to allow the enforced enslavement of US citizenry under the executive powers of the President of the United States of America during an emergency.

During the recent tragedy of the Virginia Tech, why was a reported state of emergency declared in Virginia. I never did understand legally why this happened for what was a essentially a civil criminal act.

I wasn't familiar with ASBO, so I googled it and came up with the Wikipedia explanation. Kind of strange. "The type of evidence required to obtain is much wider than for criminal cases. Both hearsay evidence and anonymous testimony are admissible as evidence." Some of the 'dangers' they use ASBOs for in Britain:
* Posting illegal flyers ('Please help Fluffy get home!')
* Begging (our beggars hold up cardboard signs, what on earth are they doing in England???)
* Trying to commit suicide. Regarding this last, if they catch you trying to kill yourself several times, they can send you to prison, where you can ask one of the other inmates to throttle you and they would probably be happy to help. Are mental hospitals as passe in Britain as they are here?
* They want to include 'fare dodging', but that hasn't been updated.

Some of the "less common ASBOs":
* Two teenage boys were forbidden to wear one golf glove (I guess they split the pair).
* One teenager was forbidden to use the word 'grass'. ("I'm going out to mow the schneckledorf, Mother!"
* One teenager was forbidden to use his front door. (Servants' entry only?)
* An old man was ordered not to yell, swear or make sarcastic remarks to his neighbors. (Does this apply to Parliment?)
* Children playing games could qualify for ASBOs. (Now that must be a scary bunch of kids!)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour_order)

Wikipedia also has similar information here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchhunt

Sue

I wasn't familiar with ASBO, so I googled it and came up with the Wikipedia explanation. Kind of strange. "The type of evidence required to obtain is much wider than for criminal cases. Both hearsay evidence and anonymous testimony are admissible as evidence." Some of the 'dangers' they use ASBOs for in Britain:
* Posting illegal flyers ('Please help Fluffy get home!')
* Begging (our beggars hold up cardboard signs, what on earth are they doing in England???)
* Trying to commit suicide. Regarding this last, if they catch you trying to kill yourself several times, they can send you to prison, where you can ask one of the other inmates to throttle you and they would probably be happy to help. Are mental hospitals as passe in Britain as they are here?
* They want to include 'fare dodging', but that hasn't been updated.

Some of the "less common ASBOs":
* Two teenage boys were forbidden to wear one golf glove (I guess they split the pair).
* One teenager was forbidden to use the word 'grass'. ("I'm going out to mow the schneckledorf, Mother!"
* One teenager was forbidden to use his front door. (Servants' entry only?)
* An old man was ordered not to yell, swear or make sarcastic remarks to his neighbors. (Does this apply to Parliment?)
* Children playing games could qualify for ASBOs. (Now that must be a scary bunch of kids!)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour_order)

Wikipedia also has similar information here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchhunt

Sue

I've come across the same reports- a lot of it strikes me as being very similar to some of the more "exclusive" communities where they limit what color of car their members can own! Now, if where those kids was playing was cemetery, that's one thing, but to give a bunch of kids what amounts to a criminal history rather than giving them a stern talk followed by one that might include a small ticket to their parents is just asinine.