Member Discussions

This is "General Discussions" where one discusses
"whatever comes to mind" so I'm posting here. If it is
deserving of deletion, I'm sure that is what will happen.

I know that sometimes I code and code and don't come up
for air until days later, or perhaps to look at this site.

For those Americans who have not been paying attention,
I'd like to let you know that you, regardless of whether
you are on American soil or not, are now
subject to military tribunal at the discretion of
the president.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006

This means "they" really can show up, take you away,
and that's the last anyone hears of you. For real.
In America.

-Crat

From your link...
"The Act changes pre-existing law to explicitly suspend the writ of habeas corpus for detainees who are not U.S. citizens."

This means "they" really can show up, take you away,
and that's the last anyone hears of you. For real.
In America.

"They" have always been able to show up and take you away.

And how exactly does one test such a device? Ask the aliens to abduct you and see if they can?

Well them space aliens are pretty smart. I expect that with their habeus corpus gone and no hope of ACLU lawyers springing them from detention at Area 51, they'll move on to greener pastures like Canadian trailer parks. The device has worked for me as I have yet to be abducted and probed. Although it is possible that "they" have and covered their tracks by using their memory wipe technology. One can never be too sure about such things.

Tyche,

You seem to be pretty good at reading legalisms when it suits
you. Perhaps you could read the law for yourself and
tell me whether it applies to US citizens.

The current consensus (Jonathan Turley's MSNBC comments,
and folks quoted in the Talk page) is that it does
indeed include American citizens.

If you haven't done anything wrong though,
you don't have to worry, though, right? Just mock
people who care. Stick with what you're good at.

-Crat

What you need to realize, Tyche, is that broadly worded laws can and WILL be enforced on everyone at some point, regardless of the original stated intent. Today, this law will be used against terrorists. Tomorrow, this law will be used against YOU.
And if that doesn't sound so bad, you also need to realize that in a military court there's no presumption of innocence, no appeal, and no lawyer.
Only our own military personnel belong in our military courts.

Jwideman wrote:

What you need to realize, Tyche, is that broadly worded laws can and WILL be enforced on everyone at some point, regardless of the original stated intent. Today, this law will be used against terrorists.

No. Today this law will be used against people the government claims are terrorists. The government also told us it knew for a fact that WMDs were in Iraq. I see little reason to believe anything the administration tells us at this point.

I, for one, am not at all willing to accept that someone is guilty of terrorism just because the government says that person is any more than I'm willing to accept that someone is guilty of murder just because the government says it is so.

--matt

Tyche,

You seem to be pretty good at reading legalisms when it suits
you. Perhaps you could read the law for yourself and
tell me whether it applies to US citizens.

Sec. 948c. Persons subject to military commissions

`Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by military commission under this chapter.

There it is, written in crystal clear unambiguous English. The entire 38 page act, chapter 47A, does not apply to U.S. citizens.

It's election season. The time of the year when email boxes are flooded with kook conspiracy theories. I remember the great draft scare of 2004. A lot of sheep were bleating that one over and over.

A similar law was already used to detain, without trial, etc at least 3 US citizens who were suspected of assisting and abetting terrorists. There is no doubt in my mind that the CIA, FBI and others will do so again.

This is a sad blow to the US Constitution, the fundamental ideals that the United States was created to safeguard. And its all wrapped up in "National Security" and safegarding the lives of American Citizens. What a crock.

unlawful enemy combatant
an individual engaged in hostilities against the United States who is not a lawful enemy combatant.

Note that - unlike the earlier draft - this has no further limitations. The individual need not be a terrorist, be identified with terrorists, be committing terrorist acts, or be aiding terrorists. They only have to be engaged in "hostilities". Now, is "hostilities" defined in this act? No. The President has defined it though, in his speeches: "Either you're with us or you stand with the terrorists." It is not at all a stretch that he will declare that anyone who speaks out against the administration is engaged in hostilities.
The act does not state that US citizens are exempt. It only states, in broad language, who is subject to it. And that group is not clearly defined.
Don't be fooled by the word "alien". Once you are declared an unlawful enemy combatant, how do you prove you're NOT an alien?
This administration has an "us vs them" mode of thought. As long as you are one of "us" you cannot possibly be confused for one of "them", so you have nothing to worry about, right?
Right. Let me ask you, Tyche - what makes you so sure you're one of "us"? "They" aren't defined very well.

It's election season. The time of the year when email boxes are flooded with kook conspiracy theories.

Yes, and I deeply resent how this administration makes me sound like a kook conspiracy theorist.

One of your most endearing qualities, Tyche, is
your tendency to adhere with great tenacity to
the "letter of the law". This makes for excellent
debate arguments, because you can simply fold your arms
and say "I need say no more. It is written."

The problem in this case is exactly that people
can look at this law and draw their own interpretation
from it. Yours is that US citizens are exempt from
summary detention on US soil, despite being ruled
Unlawful Enemy Combatants.

I argue that if Joe Sixpack in CONUS is
ruled to be an Unlawful Enemy Combatant, this law
provides ample cover for the government to pick him
up and quietly hang on to him. Even though it
may be ruled unconstitutional, or even though
the people executing the detention may be ruled
to have been mistaken in their interpretation, the
fact that reasonable people disagree on this point
provides an excellent defense to the feds.

I think that, wherever I ask the question, there
isn't consensus on what is or is not legal per this
law. Certainly we can speculate on what is or isn't
constitutional, but there is some question as to
whether any member of the executive branch would be
spanked for believing this to make any person,
citizen or not, an enemy combatant subject to detainment.

The fact that it is so debatable whether this applies
to US citizens on American soil is cover for
extrajudicial imprisonment and worse. It is de facto
a revocation of my right to a jury trial, because if
I am unjustly detained, and the individuals involved
choose to abuse their privilege, what recourse do I have?

Remember also that many of the civil rights abuses in this
country have occurred through the zealous adherence
to the "letter of the law" of laws worded in ways
open to interpretation.

The act is awful in enough in what it *does*
explicitly say. Outright stripping habeas corpus
from aliens at the sole discretion of the
executive is a horrific and deeply dangerous thing.

But it also *effectively* strips habeas corpus from
everyone else, by providing cover to those who
accidentally, or wilfully, interpret the "letter
of the law" that way and are charged with carrying out
the orders of the executive.

I know you're smart enough to know how things really work.
I hope you're intellectually honest enough to recognize
the legitimate threat this law poses to civil rights
on American soil.

I'm already disappointed that you'd rather resort
to ridiculing and mockery than deal with this seriously.
Please don't disappoint me further by denying the reality
of the plausible excuse this provides those intent
on helping us trade liberty for security.

-Crat

You are obviously against us. Your hostile comments have been forwarded to the Department of Homeland Security. Agents should be there shortly to help persuade you to support America and freedom. Should you continue in such terroristic thoughts you will be detained indefinitely and interrogation, lawful of course, will be employed to determine what you know. I hear that phobic methods tend to be particularly effective with your kind. Of course, you could always simply turn over other terrorists....

The act does not state that US citizens are exempt. It only states, in broad language, who is subject to it. And that group is not clearly defined.

There are many ordinances in law (tax, immigration and even copyright) that state this section or chapter applies to aliens (or non-citizens). The argument of non-exclusion is completely specious. Ordinances list conditions either by exclusion or inclusion. This law simply cannot be applied to U.S. citizens as written.

The argument that a ordinance written...
"This law applies to persons who are left-handed."
could apply to right-handed persons is ridiculous.

Yours is that US citizens are exempt from
summary detention on US soil, despite being ruled
Unlawful Enemy Combatants.

No it isn't. My conclusion is that this law only affects aliens. US citizens may or may not be subject to summary detention under other laws or powers. And that is nothing new under the sun. Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt detained thousands of U.S. citizens by executive fiat.

I find this part of the law appalling. It is in the Revision to the War crimes Act.

RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.--The
amendments made by this subsection, except as
specified in subsection (d)(2)(E) of section 2441 of
title 18, United States Code, shall take effect as of
November 26, 1997, as if enacted immediately after
the amendments made by section 583 of Public Law
105118 (as amended by section 4002(e)(7) of Pub-
lic Law 107273).


Usually laws take affect on the date of enactment, not close to 10 years earlier. Shockingly this is skipped in the so-called "liberal" media.

They are giving anyone that has committed what has been a war crime since the passage of the previous law a pass. Handy way to grant a pardon without ever having to actually pardon anyone, eh?

This will absolve everyone in the current (and even end of the previous) administration of any crimes they may have committed if they authorized torture (as defined previously).

The argument that a ordinance written...
"This law applies to persons who are left-handed."
could apply to right-handed persons is ridiculous.

You're confusing a statement of inclusion for a statement of exclusion, Tyche.

Btw, while reading over this, I didn't see where American citizens, on US soil or not are excluded from being detained. And what happens if someone gets a hair up the butt about it, and protestors go nuts cause they "detain" an American Citizen and either the Executive or Legislative Branches (I forget who has the authority) strips the person of their citizenship?

What about longstanding "resident aliens" who don't have their citizenship yet for one reason or another? What about children born to these people on US soil? That grants automatic citizenship to these children, can the government then declare their citizenship null and void if their parents are found to be engaging in hostile acts against the United States?

This law does not protect the United States OR its citizens. All it is, is a BS excuse to remove more of our civil liberties (which oddly enough, I thought Tyche was for), whether or not you're a citizen of the United States.

I'm a US Citizen and live in Canada, does that mean I'm automatically less cared about than my folks who still live in the US? Are we going to now have classes of citizens? Do you lose that privilidged status of being on American soil and "immune" to the detaining if you're visiting friends/relatives in Britain or Canada?

Many resident aliens have been living in the United States as productive members of the United States, and love it JUST as much (and sometimes more because they moved there...which means they made a CHOICE to be there) as born and bred citizens. Are they now to fear for their very lives that some Fed or cop is going to show up and detain them forever, and they'd never see their families and loved ones EVER again? My mother-in-law lives in Arizona, she is not a citizen, my father-in-law is. My mother-in-law is a resident alien who chose not to gain citizenship for whatever reason, I'd be pretty freakin pissed off if the FBI showed up and took her away for being suspect.

The US government violates civil rights and liberties time and again, all in the vaunted name of National Security...like they did to the American Indians, Japanese-Americans, German-Americans, and so many more. And WE, as Citizens ALLOW it because we do not say, "NO MORE". Someone needs to send these idiots in Washington a wake-up call and remind them, THEY WORK FOR US, cause it seems they forgot that. This law is nothing but condonment of torture of US citizens, resident aliens and foreign nationals. Last I checked folks, that usually leads to WAR, and ya know what? I really hate to say this, but the world has every right to get majorly pissed off at the US for this one. It is a complete and total break from the Geneva Conventions, which the US signed. Christ, the US is supposed to be an example and better than this. I hope to God Bush and ALL of the people who voted this law in get impeached. Time to get these fruitcakes the hell out of office before they end up getting us ALL killed, tortured, maimed or to disappear into a dark cell somewhere, where no one will ever see us again.

*shouts from the back of the group*

I say we strip Crat nekkid and make him walk around on a leash with womens underwear on his head!!! HAHAHA.

Seriously this law is not a problem and you guys arguing the slippery slope angle are a little hot with the rhetoric.

Applying this to US Citizens isn't a tiny step beyond this its way way way far beyond... like run past the purple house until you cross three state lines and one of them should be Texas far beyond.

So, relax. This isn't a big deal. Now the aliens Tyche mentioned. Those are an actual worry. Speaking of aliens I better go check the batteries in my alien detectors... I haven't done that since this morning!

Btw, while reading over this, I didn't see where American citizens, on US soil or not are excluded from being detained.

Why would you expect to see any such thing? The law was written to provide procedures and miltary tribunals for alien unlawful combatants.

This law does not protect the United States OR its citizens.

This law doesn't apply to U.S. citizens. I'm quite certain that the purpose of this act is a direct response to the Supreme Court ruling for Congress to provide these military tribunal procedures, rather than the just the Executive. Does the prosecution and punishment of those alien detainees further the security of the United States? What would you do with them?

Now my personal opinion is that we ought to transfer them to the governments of their home countries (which include Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Afghanistan) and let them take care of them.

It's the, apparently common, notion that this law gets really bad only when the sacred beings known as Americans are subject to it, that fuels the hatred to these hallowed people, which again is what allows their leaders to pull off this kind of crap.

I'd have them tried by the World Court or UN for committing or being suspected of committing or abetting in acts of terror, which is a global problem. Failing that proceedure ever occuring, they should either a) be deported back to their country of origins (unless it has shown to help the terrorists in which case default to option b) or b) tried in the United States, WITHOUT suspension of civil liberties.

My main concern with this new law is that it opens the door for US soldiers, etc to commit travesties such as torture, drop the suspects in a deep dark hole and leave them to rot while US citizens pay for their food and such. I don't feel it to be right that they should not be speedily tried and punished for their crimes. Then again I also feel that anyone found to have committed acts of terror should be tried for pre-meditated murder and if found guilty have a grenade shoved up their arse and the pin pulled.