Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Still Tearing Up the Constitution
Last Tuesday's election seems to have changed nothing when it comes to how the administration plans to treat people accused of "terrorism":
Let's reiterate - under the Military Commissions Act of 2006, American citizens as well as "foreign fighters" and "immigrants" can be declared "enemy combatants," whisked off the street, held in jail indefinitely without charges being filed, and denied the right of habeas corpus.
George W. Bush now has dictatorial powers that rival Stalin's in scope. He can arrest any person - foreign or American - and throw them away in jail without a key simply by declaring them "enemy combatants."
Perhaps that ought to be a law this new House of Representatives and Senate take a look at in January.
Cuz' I get the feeling this psycho in the White House is just delusional enough to declare any person elected president after him who runs and wins on a platform of withdrawl from Iraq an "enemy combatant."Or any Congress that attempts to circumvent his "Stand and Bleed" Iraq policy "enemy combatants," for that matter.
And as for James Baker's Iraq Group, don't you get the feeling that's sorta one of these bipartisan commissions created to spread the blame around and give Bush cover for this worst foreign policy failure ever by bringing Dems in on it with him?
Immigrants arrested in the United States may be held indefinitely on suspicion of terrorism and may not challenge their imprisonment in civilian courts, the Bush administration said Monday, opening a new legal front in the fight over the rights of detainees.
In court documents filed with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., the Justice Department said a new anti-terrorism law being used to hold detainees in Guantanamo Bay also applies to foreigners captured and held in the United States.
Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar, was arrested in 2001 while studying in the United States. He has been labeled an "enemy combatant," a designation that, under a law signed last month, strips foreigners of the right to challenge their detention in federal courts.
That law is being used to argue the Guantanamo Bay cases, but Al-Marri represents the first detainee inside the United States to come under the new law. Aliens normally have the right to contest their imprisonment, such as when they are arrested on immigration violations or for other crimes.
"It's pretty stunning that any alien living in the United States can be denied this right," said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney for Al-Marri. "It means any non-citizen, and there are millions of them, can be whisked off at night and be put in detention."
The new law says that enemy combatants will be tried before military commissions, not a civilian judge or jury, and establishes different rules of evidence in the cases. It also prohibits detainees from challenging their detention in civilian court.
In a separate court filing in Washington on Monday, the Justice Department defended that law as constitutional and necessary.
Government attorneys said foreign fighters arrested as part of an overseas military action have no constitutional rights and are being afforded more legal rights than ever.
Let's reiterate - under the Military Commissions Act of 2006, American citizens as well as "foreign fighters" and "immigrants" can be declared "enemy combatants," whisked off the street, held in jail indefinitely without charges being filed, and denied the right of habeas corpus.
George W. Bush now has dictatorial powers that rival Stalin's in scope. He can arrest any person - foreign or American - and throw them away in jail without a key simply by declaring them "enemy combatants."
Perhaps that ought to be a law this new House of Representatives and Senate take a look at in January.
Cuz' I get the feeling this psycho in the White House is just delusional enough to declare any person elected president after him who runs and wins on a platform of withdrawl from Iraq an "enemy combatant."Or any Congress that attempts to circumvent his "Stand and Bleed" Iraq policy "enemy combatants," for that matter.
And as for James Baker's Iraq Group, don't you get the feeling that's sorta one of these bipartisan commissions created to spread the blame around and give Bush cover for this worst foreign policy failure ever by bringing Dems in on it with him?
Comments:
<< Home
It won't go that far. Don't worry, the Baker commission is going to give him some options and give him a little push so he can save face.
Then he hightails it out of there. Bush just wants this to be over now. He might break before this is through.
But no, Baker will push gently but firmly and they will all take it. Oh, how I would love to see them in the meeting.
Then he hightails it out of there. Bush just wants this to be over now. He might break before this is through.
But no, Baker will push gently but firmly and they will all take it. Oh, how I would love to see them in the meeting.
reality,
As usual you have turned the reality of the anti-terrorism law on its head. And you quote the attorney of probably the only person arrested under this provision as someone whose aghastness is sincere.
Your wrote:
"The new law says that enemy combatants will be tried before military commissions, not a civilian judge or jury, and establishes different rules of evidence in the cases."
Why would you believe it makes sense to try a military issue in a civilian court? Terrorism is not a civilian problem.
You wrote:
"It also prohibits detainees from challenging their detention in civilian court."
But this doesn't mean the detained person is without legal recourse.
Then you went off the deep end with your own reasoning when you stated:
"George W. Bush now has dictatorial powers that rival Stalin's in scope."
Right. There are millions of Americans in our own Gulag.
And you ranted:
"He can arrest any person - foreign or American - and throw them away in jail without a key simply by declaring them "enemy combatants."
Wanna bet he's got that kind of power?
As usual you have turned the reality of the anti-terrorism law on its head. And you quote the attorney of probably the only person arrested under this provision as someone whose aghastness is sincere.
Your wrote:
"The new law says that enemy combatants will be tried before military commissions, not a civilian judge or jury, and establishes different rules of evidence in the cases."
Why would you believe it makes sense to try a military issue in a civilian court? Terrorism is not a civilian problem.
You wrote:
"It also prohibits detainees from challenging their detention in civilian court."
But this doesn't mean the detained person is without legal recourse.
Then you went off the deep end with your own reasoning when you stated:
"George W. Bush now has dictatorial powers that rival Stalin's in scope."
Right. There are millions of Americans in our own Gulag.
And you ranted:
"He can arrest any person - foreign or American - and throw them away in jail without a key simply by declaring them "enemy combatants."
Wanna bet he's got that kind of power?
Pt, I hope you are right. I really do. But then I get to thinking about how Bush sees Iraq as his Legacy (and rightfully so - how the Iraq war turns out will have a great influence on how his presidency will be judged by history) and I start wondering. And then you hear McCain talking about sending more troops in. As if we have any more troops to send in! And I start wondering, will the boys decide to double down on Iraq and go for broke? I mean, what could possibly happen to them politically? They lose the House and Senate?
I dunno. I guess we'll know right after the new year.
N_s, to give the feds the right to arrest and detaine anybody indefinitely w/out charges being filed and without them being able to contest their imprisonment is really far down the slippery slope that abi mentions in his comment. Sorry - terrorism isn't the end of the fucking world nor should it be the end of the fucking constitution. People accused of being terrorists can be tried in courts of law and be provided with constitutional guarantees like habeus corprus. And you know what they should? Because just because the fucking gov't says they're terrorists doesn't mean they're terrorists. You'll note that more than half the people arrested by the Brits in the summer for getting ready to blow up airplanes with shampoo have been let go since then. Under the Bush admin policies, those guys would still be in jail whether they were innocent or not.
abi, you hit the nail right on the head.
I dunno. I guess we'll know right after the new year.
N_s, to give the feds the right to arrest and detaine anybody indefinitely w/out charges being filed and without them being able to contest their imprisonment is really far down the slippery slope that abi mentions in his comment. Sorry - terrorism isn't the end of the fucking world nor should it be the end of the fucking constitution. People accused of being terrorists can be tried in courts of law and be provided with constitutional guarantees like habeus corprus. And you know what they should? Because just because the fucking gov't says they're terrorists doesn't mean they're terrorists. You'll note that more than half the people arrested by the Brits in the summer for getting ready to blow up airplanes with shampoo have been let go since then. Under the Bush admin policies, those guys would still be in jail whether they were innocent or not.
abi, you hit the nail right on the head.
I hope I am right too. We will see.
By the way, if you haven't seen this picture have a look right now.
Priceless.
By the way, if you haven't seen this picture have a look right now.
Priceless.
Your post cites yet another example of why the left are in support of our enemies. Check out my latest post on this. I welcome open dialogue. Your feedback is actually welcomed because I don't have a fair and equally balanced discussion going on over there.
http://steveshodgepodge.blogspot.com/2006/11/al-qaida-gloats-over-us-elections.html
Don't take my statement personal. A lot of people might not be aware that they are aiding the enemy. In my opinion, fighting against the administration's wishes to make things tough for enemy combatants is only opening the doors for those that want to harm us.
Post a Comment
http://steveshodgepodge.blogspot.com/2006/11/al-qaida-gloats-over-us-elections.html
Don't take my statement personal. A lot of people might not be aware that they are aiding the enemy. In my opinion, fighting against the administration's wishes to make things tough for enemy combatants is only opening the doors for those that want to harm us.
# posted by 
: 8:22 PM
: 8:22 PM << Home
