ThinkFast: October 19, 2006
ThinkFast: October 19, 2006
“Evangelical Christian leaders are tackling a growing list of domestic and international issues, such as genocide in Darfur and global warming.” Today, a “broad coalition of evangelical leaders will begin airing advertisements on Christian radio stations calling for action to address climate change.”
October is on track to be the third-deadliest month of the war, despite the fact that the “military has not conducted any major operations.” The two months with higher casualty rates — Apr. 2004 and Nov. 2004 — “were marked by full-scale offensives in Falluja and Najaf.”
Addressing Bush’s false claim that detainees will be able to “hear all the evidence against them,” MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann said last night, “The Military Commissions act specifically permits the introduction of classified evidence not made available to the defense. Your words are lies, Sir. They are lies, that imperil us all.”
A National Research Council study reports a “demonstrably downward” trend in the population of birds, bees, bats and other species that pollinate North American plant life. The trend could damage dozens of commercially important crops, scientists warned, because three-fourths of all flowering plants depend on pollinators for fertilization.
Staff on the House Veterans Affairs Committee report that the “number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who have sought help for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) doubled — from nearly 4,500 to more than 9,000 — from October 2005 through June 2006.”
CNN has given 50 times as much coverage to a controversial land deal by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) than to a land deal (worth more than two times as much) made by House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL).
“Information in an attack ad run by Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-CO) against his Democratic opponent for governor used illegal confidential information from a federal law enforcement database.” The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has asked the FBI to join a criminal investigation into the ad.
“Half of all Americans believe most members of Congress are corrupt,” according to a new CNN poll, “a figure that has risen 12 points since the start of the year - and more than a third even think their own representatives are crooked.”
And finally: With full Windsors and justice for all. Before a debate with challenger Don Hilliard, Rep. John Peterson (R-PA) “asked everyone to say the Pledge of Allegiance.” Unfortunately, “there was no American flag anywhere in the hall to pledge allegiance to.” “So the moderator, spotting Peterson’s wide, American flag-themed tie, asked everyone to turn their attention to Peterson, who obliged by putting his right hand over his breast and holding his tie out for the crowd to revere.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Did everyone view Keith’s Habeas Corpus clip? It’s great. I think Crooks and Liars has the clip posted. It is a must see!!! Send it to all the cons you know, spread the word.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:04 amWell, we’ve had one full day of the Military Commissions Act which gives the President King powers. How do you feel?
Do you feel like an American?
October 19th, 2006 at 9:04 amDo you feel like an enemy combatant?
Do you know what an enemy combatant is?
Do you know how many Democrats voted to give the President this power?
Did everyone see Keith O’s Habeas Corpus clip yet. I think Crooks and Liars has it posted. It’s a must see!!!!
October 19th, 2006 at 9:05 amYour words are lies, Sir. They are lies, that imperil us all.â€
October 19th, 2006 at 9:10 amWhy do Republicans have to lie to ‘tell the truth’?
Why is our President too stubborn to tell the truth?
Is personal gain & wealth the driving force? When did accountability take a back seat to partisanship?
Keith O is one voice out there, where are all the rest? Why is an 800 yr. old ’standard of democracy’ like Habeus Corpus suddenly extinct?
Americans must ask themselves these questions on Nov. 7th.
Piss on partisanship, let’s do what’s right for the common good and take back America in November.
Riverbend is back and writes with an authority lacking by the talking heads.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:15 amTHANK GOD FOR KEITH OLBERMAN! IN A HUNDRED YEARS KIDS SHOULD BE READING ABOUT THE BRAVE STAND THAT KEITH TOOK TO DEFEND HIS COUNTRY!
If we had a real new media they’d all of been saying EXACTLY what Keith was saying last night. Unfortunately we have a corporate media and they will remain silent because their corporate masters tell them to do so.
F*ck ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN & FOX! Their silence on this law reveals them as ANTI-Habeas Corpus. Their silence reveals them as Anti-American. Their silence reveals them for the Bush-ass kissers they are.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:21 amWhat kind of party gets endorsed by known killers and convicted rapists?
The Republican Party of 2006.
-GSD
October 19th, 2006 at 9:22 amBirds, Bats and Bees.
We should give Bush the Bird, I think…
October 19th, 2006 at 9:22 am…with an authority lacking by the talking heads.
Comment by Jaded Prole — October 19, 2006 @ 9:15 am
I dunno, I always thought David Byrne was a very authoritative musician and composer. And “Stop Making Sense” is thought by many to be the best concert film ever produced.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:24 amFrom Olbermann:
October 19th, 2006 at 9:32 amBecause the United States Constitution is part of the 8th grade curriculum, I spent the last two days going over the Military Commissions Act of 2006 with my students and comparing what the Constitution says with what the Act allows.
Many of my students are legal immigrants from Mexico. Some of them, or members of their families, participated in the protest last May. The MCA covers activities before, on, or after 9/11/01, and therefore could be used against the Hispanic protesters of May, 2006. The phrase “hostilities against the United States” is undefined in the MCA.
One of my students asked if there was anything stopping the government from arresting anyone. I stood, silent, in front of my class as I tried to come up with something. I couldn’t. Olbermann has made the same observation. So did a guest speaker on Randi Rhodes yesterday afternoon.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:40 amNBC is cutting $750 million out of its operating budget…
…shows are going to be cancelled at MSNBC as well…
…if Olbermann gets canned…
…EVERY thinking American should make NBC HISTORY!
October 19th, 2006 at 9:40 amHow much will the states have to spend from their Education coffers to issue middle school teachers ‘asterisk’ stamps… so they can update all textbook references to Habeus Corpus with the new, Bush-driven definition..?
Wake up, America.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:48 amOlbermann’s comment was the finest truth I’ve heard in my lifetime. Yes mr bush, YOU could be held in JAIL by your own dictator laws….this law WILL be overturned in the future…COUNT ON IT.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:58 amOlbermann mentions Attorney General Gonzales. Yesterday, Gonzales did a Q&A session on line. Although he did not answer my questions, he did address others. And remember, this is the Attorney General who advised the President that he can torture people if he so chooses. Here’s one of the questions, with the AG’s reply:
Jeff, from Ely, Nevada writes:
Attorney General Gonzalez it is an honor to speak to you, I look up to you a lot. Can you elaborate on what resources the Military Commissions Act gives the military in terms of what they need to save lives and protect America?
Alberto Gonzales
Clarity in the law? The President gets to define the Geneva Convention. That means anything goes. And prisoners can no longer claim the Geneva Convention as a source of rights. Every legal immigrant in America has lost the protection of the Constitution.
And the rest of us? Is it too far-fectched for our Government to claim that it has classified evidence that you renounced your citizenship? Could you be rousted from your bed by hooded men with assault rifles in the middle of the night and shipped off to Hotel Halliburton? Or, as Orwell called it, The Ministry of Love.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:01 amI want to hear the blind followers of Bush explain how they can countenance his prolific lying. Come on, trolls, does the truth mean nothing to you?
October 19th, 2006 at 10:01 am#11, bnf, As I’ve been posting on this site for the last 3 days (but ignored by almost everyone here) WE’RE ALL POTENTIAL UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANTS.
The decision whether we are Unlawful Enemy Combatants is entirely up to George W. Bush…A psychological/spiritual mess of a human being.
George W. Bush…Who as a young child put firecrackers in frogs and blew them up…Who as a young adult got himself addicted to alcohol and cocaine and has never completely recovered…Who sold stock illegally as an Inside Trader but got bailed out from an SEC investigation by his dad…A person who walked away from his military commitment so someone else could serve in his place and possibly die….Who as a governor laughed when he executed a retarded person…Who claims God talks to him and directed him to attack virtually defenseless people who were no threat to us…Who killed up to 600,000 of these people, half of whom may be women and children…and at least a portion of the reason was revenge for an attempt on his father’s life.
This is who will now decide whether you and I are Unlawful Enemy Combatants to be thrown in a far away prison, torturted, potentially forever, with no rights to counsel or to hear the charges or see the evidence against us.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:01 amOlbermann also knows from history that he could be one of the first to disappear. For those of you who believe in prayer, now would be a good time to ask for his protection and safety.
The same goes for Cindy Sheehan, Ann Wright, and all those who protest the war and the actions of this Administration.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:04 amBush and his band of Nazi enablers and supporters have crossed the Rubicon.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:06 amWhat mischief is the Bush Regime up to today? Will Dubya Dunce Decider Despot attack Iran next week? Will Rove pull a surprise?
October 19th, 2006 at 10:09 amLarry from c #17
…have no fear (of being ignored)…
…you’re preaching to the choir nephew…
…we’re ALL on your side and understand the gravity of this situation…
…we’re ALL (prudently) awaiting the outcome of the elections…
…a Democrat takeover means the criminal Bushiva’s Constitutional usurpation is nothing more than a wasted power grab gone awry…
…a suspicious Repulsivescam retention means America won’t last long…
…let’s hope the ‘CONNED’servative evangelicrites:
a) stay at home
or
b) see the REAL light…
October 19th, 2006 at 10:13 amWhat mischief is the Bush Regime up to today? Will Dubya Dunce Decider Despot attack Iran next week? Will Rove pull a surprise?
Comment by Jay Randal — October 19, 2006 @ 10:09 am
I picture Bush, a cruel little momma’s boy if there ever was one, shoving firecrackers up the asses of frogs and blowing them up in the Rose Garden. Just a little fun before breakfast for the Decider-in-Chief.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:15 amShame on Us All
By Robert Parry October 18, 2006
History should record October 17, 2006, as the reverse of July 4, 1776.
Make copies of this article and pass them out everywhere you can:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/101806.html
October 19th, 2006 at 10:15 amSo how long will it be before one of the troll team members posts something faux-dismissive on this thread about how angry we are?
October 19th, 2006 at 10:17 amPost 24 > the Bush lover trolls are not awake yet > after drinking booze all night they have to sober up, so will be on here later > lol.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:21 amAddressing Bush’s false claim that detainees will be able to “hear all the evidence against them,†MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann said last night, “The Military Commissions act specifically permits the introduction of classified evidence not made available to the defense. Your words are lies, Sir. They are lies, that imperil us all.â€
This is the closest you’re going to come to this issue, isn’t it TP?
You suck.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:21 amJeff, from Ely, Nevada writes:
Attorney General Gonzalez it is an honor to speak to you, I look up to you a lot. Can you elaborate on what resources the Military Commissions Act gives the military in terms of what they need to save lives and protect America?
…
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
That’s not even a real quesion.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:23 amThe rumor mill on the so-called “Arab street” is a very venerable form of communication and news gathering…
…if this is so Iraq is going to explode even louder in the next few weeks and months…
…this morning on C-Span an article “leaking” the Baker Commission’s reported choices…
…listed two very disturbing possibilities:
1) dividing the country into three parts based on religion, ethnicity etc.
and THE MOST disturbing…
2) the U.S. miltary OVERTHROWING the Al Maliki government and installing a “strongman”…
…can you say Saddam “redux”?
October 19th, 2006 at 10:25 amA little levity for a sad morning. A joke I heard on Al Franken’s show that makes the case better than I ever could.
You know how there’s always a scene in a movie where a person is being dragged out of a courtroom screaming, “I’m not guilty of….”
Now with Bush’s Military Commissions Act the scene will end with the person screaming, “I’m not guilty…with whatever you charged me with!”
October 19th, 2006 at 10:26 amThat’s not even a real quesion.
Comment by Zooey — October 19, 2006 @ 10:23 am
Sounds like a question Jeff Gannon would write.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:27 amSounds like a question Jeff Gannon would write.
Comment by RealScientist
Exactly.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:28 amRe: the number of PTSD cases which have doubled over the past year. The Oscar winning 1974 documentary Hearts and Minds should be re-released in theaters nationwide so that people can see the trauma that was wreaked upon those who fought in a war, in that case a conflict called the Vietnam War. The public should be seeing the damage that war causes on those who fight in a war today and those who are its victims but that view of war is sanitized on televisions across the country, thus proving the adage that out of sight for so many people is out of mind.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:29 amWow, Zooey.
Don’t hold back, tell us how you really feel.
October 19th, 2006 at 10:30 am;)
Zooey and RealScientist,
I’ll go you one better…
…sounds like a question…
…Barney the dog would write…
…if he could…
…but since he can’t…
…Bushiva wrote it for him…
October 19th, 2006 at 10:41 amHere’s your girl:
http://www.chron.com/ content/ news/ photos/ 06/ 10/ 15/ na/
October 19th, 2006 at 10:42 amOy.
Your national security letter is in the mail.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:13 amThank you Olbermann, may you stay on the air, and continue your work.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:16 amBack in 2002, the President determined that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, a provision that had previously been applied in civil wars, did not apply to the War on Terror.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:19 amNow that’s freakin interesting. 9/11 hadn’t even happened yet and yet….????WTF???
Olbermann said what I think alot of us have been wanting to hear from the rest of the brain dead talking heads all along.
May Keith keep speaking out and speaking truth to power. And may he avoid being one of those who eventually will be “disappeared” by the criminals currently in power.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:20 amOoops, pardon my posting error, I meant the Iraq war hadn’t been launched yet…
October 19th, 2006 at 11:23 am#38, RUCerious….Ummmmmm….Are you seriois? The September 11 attacks took place in 2001.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:26 am#38, RUCerious….Ummmmmm….Are you serious? The September 11 attacks took place in 2001.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:27 am#40…RUCerious….Ah. Understood.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:27 amNice catch Exley! Every once in a while my brain takes a Bush on me.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:34 am#44 It happens to all of us at some point, RU….
October 19th, 2006 at 11:36 amExley
Since you saw the pitch by RUCerious, do you care to take a swing at the content?
October 19th, 2006 at 11:39 amPLC, my main point was that I don’t recall ever hearing about this HUGE policy shift anytime around 2002. The Afghan campaign was in full swing, but maybe Exley could refresh my memory about this ever being made public…
October 19th, 2006 at 11:54 amHey PLC,
Well, the President was correct back in 2002. Common Article 3 applies only to conflicts “not of an international character;” in other words civil wars and wars of rebellion within a state. The conflict with al Qaeda is clearly international in character. Thus, Common Article 3 should be inapplicable. However, the Supreme Court has erroneously determined otherwise (And before anyone starts saying, “You think you know more than the Supreme Court,” just ask yourselves whether you have agreed with every Supreme Court decision) and because the Court so ruled, the Administration used the MCA to define the parameters of Common Article 3 for the United States, which as a sovereign nation it is entitled to do.
As for the rest of Olbermann’s desperate and somewhat laughable Edward R. Murrow parody, he insists on making misstatements of fact, such as his absurd claim that habeas corpus has been done away with. As anyone who actually reads the MCA can see, the habeas corpus provisions of the legislation do not apply to U.S. citizens, but only to alien unlawfule enmy combatants. This is nothing new. Combatants captured by the U.S. in World War II, Korea, Vietnam on the battlefield never had a right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Thus, the MCA provisions on habeas corpus do little more than codify how the U.S., and other Western nations, has treated enemy combantants throughout its history.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:55 amPledge of allegiance to a flag-themed tie? Now if that isn’t disrespectful to the flag, I don’t know what is.
Not the most important news story, but definitely telling in how repubs LOVE to invoke their false patriotism so much, they’ll stoop to any level.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:57 amPost 24 > the Bush lover trolls are not awake yet > after drinking booze all night they have to sober up, so will be on here later > lol.
Comment by Jay Randal — October 19, 2006 @ 10:21 am
Roger_Roger is up and posting bizarre crap on the other threads, so I think he is either still drunk from last night, or hitting the bottle fast and hard this morning.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:08 pmMight I suggest everyone quite feeding the attention to Exley he so desperatly needs. His Rune is Wisdom: Reversed. Ironically, that’s the same Rune that came up for President Bush.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:17 pmExley
The problem I see is this - “Combatants captured by the U.S. in World War II, Korea, Vietnam” were, as you said, “on the battlefield” and, moreover, in uniform. Thus, they were clearly combatants. In a “war” on terror or in placing our military in a civil war, there is a great chance that we will (have) capture individuals who are not so clearly combatants but suspected of being so or reported to be so by a third party, who may have an ulterior motive. A writ of habeus corpus should be available for innocents in the wrong place at the wrong time to defend themselves.
I will also freely admit that I profoundly mistrust this administration and its willingness/ability to refrain from misusing its powers for political/personal gain.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:17 pmAs anyone who actually reads the MCA can see, the habeas corpus provisions of the legislation do not apply to U.S. citizens, but only to alien unlawfule enmy combatants. This is nothing new. Exley
I guess Exley forgot about Jose Padilla.
Padilla is a US citizen, who was ruled an enemy combattant by the Bush Junta.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:26 pm#49-It would have been much more interesting if someone had been wearing flag-printed boxers. I can just see it now…
Exley: Aaaghhh! The Mets are just teasing us, I can’t stand it!
October 19th, 2006 at 12:28 pm#53….You are confused. Certainly, U.S. citizens can be declared enemy combatants. This too is a practice that is not new. See Ex Parte Quirin, a World War II-era Supreme Court decision regarding FDR’s military commissions and unlawful enemy combatants, including U.S. citizens.
Under the MCA, a U.S. citizen who is declared an unlawful enemy combatant has the right to file for a petition of habeas corpus.
You are getting confused over the issues of declaring someone an unlawful enemy combatant and the legal remedies available to them. Again, a U.S citizen who has been declared an unlawful enemy combatant may file for a habeas corpus writ (including someone like Jose Padilla) while an alien unlawful enemy combatant may not, in keeping with traditional U.S. and Western practices regarding captured enemy combatants.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:36 pm#54 Jane! Thank God you are here! We fans need to stick together, especially on the day of ame 7! This series is nerve-wracking, isn’t it? But tonight we can make history! We are at Shea, baby! And we are gonna win! LET’S GO METS!
October 19th, 2006 at 12:38 pmExley
Read the whole thing, now point out to me who a US Citizen could appeal to if he or she got taken. There is no right of appeal available, therefore there is no limit to who can be incarcerated.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:41 pmDon’t worry, Exley, I’m here :-) We’ll get through this!
But…I’m sorry, I feel that you’re wrong about the Military Commissions act. I don’t believe that there’s anything to stop this admistration from, say, deciding that anyone who posts on a progressive/liberal website can be taken in for no other reason. What if ‘they’ decided that it didn’t matter what you post on the website, just the act of posting on that particular site made you the enemy in their eyes. That would affect even you.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:53 pmJane, and if they had “classified evidence” which “proved” you were not a U.S. citizen, you could be held for the rest of your natural life as an alien, pending a determination of whether or not you even were an unlawful enemy combatant.
Clearly legal immigrants have lost their Constitutional protections. Attorney General Gonzalez didn’t even bother to address my question on the issue.
The question is, how much do you trust a President who lied to get us into a war, who has already violated the Constitution and International Law, how much do you trust Him to uphold any of your rights?
*** crickets chirping ***
October 19th, 2006 at 1:04 pmBris, I don’t trust this president to even be able to pronounce the word “Constitution” without stumbling, of course I don’t trust him to uphold any of our rights. He is a pathological liar, and his administration and spokespeople lie to us every day. Keith is right, this is the beginning of the end of America.
October 19th, 2006 at 1:09 pmYou would think that a man as patriotic (or attempting to appear so patriotic) as Rep. John Peterson (R-PA) would know not to wear the American Flag as apparel.
October 19th, 2006 at 1:37 pm#58, Bruce…You have put your finger on why the hysteria over the Military Commissions Act and its habeas corpus provisions are overblown. As pointed out earlier, the MCA habeas corpus provisions apply only to alien unlawful enemy combatants. That is crystal clear from the language of the statute. Now, you request that it out to you “who a US Citizen could appeal to if he or she got taken.”
That issue has already been decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), in which the Court held that U.S. citizens held as enemy combatants cannot be held indefinitely without be afforded due process protections, as well as the right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Because the MCA leaves the Hamdi decision undisturbed, it remain the law of the land.
October 19th, 2006 at 2:08 pmWhy is Bush buying land in Paruguay (sp)? Isn’t that one of the places the Nazis ran to after WWII?
October 19th, 2006 at 2:13 pm#52 PLC, Actually the Quirin decision dealt with the issue of unlawful enemy combatants (Nazi saboteurs) captured on U.S. soil (including an American citizen). They were not lawful combatants captured in uniform on the battlefield.
Moreover, the MCA specifically and explicitly states that military commissions have no jurisdiction over captured lawful combatants:
Sec. 948d: Jurisdiction of military commissions`
(b) Lawful Enemy Combatants- Military commissions under this chapter shall not have jurisdiction over lawful enemy combatants
October 19th, 2006 at 2:14 pm65 Exley
It seems that you just provided evidence that what we had worked. So why is BushCo messing with it?
October 19th, 2006 at 2:27 pm#66 PLC,
It was not Bush was messed with it. It was the Supreme Court. Bush, in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief (using, in part, the example provided by FDR when he established military commissions during WWII) and as implicitly authorized by Congress’ 9/18/2001 AUMF, ordered the establishment of military commissions for use during the War On Terror.
In the Hamdan decision, the Supreme Court decided (erroneously, in my opinion) that even though FDR (and other president, such as Lincoln) had created military commissions, which had tried and convicted unlawful enemy combatants, including U.S. citizens, Bush did not have the constitutional authority as President to create such commissions without specific congressional approval. (The administration had argued that the president in his constitutional role as C-in-C and the AUMF provided all the necessary authorization to create such commissions. A majority of the Court disagreed). Thus, in keeping with the direction provided by the Supreme Court in the Hamdan decision, the Bush administration went to Congress and asked for specific, explict approval of the military commissions. This the Congress did when it passed the MCA, which the president signed this week.
October 19th, 2006 at 2:37 pmAs I mentioned, when the Nazi saboteurs were catured in the U.S., they were not wearing uniforms. As Chief Justice Stone wrote in the Qurin decision, “Immediately after landing they buried their uniforms and the other articles mentioned and proceeded in civilian dress to New York City.”
“By a long course of practical administrative construction by its military authorities, our Government has recognized that those who during time of war pass surreptitiously from enemy territory into our own, discarding their uniforms upon entry, for the commission of hostile acts involving destruction of life or property, have the status of unlawful combatants punishable as such by military commission. This precept of the law of war has been so recognized in practice both here and abroad, and has so generally been accepted as valid by authorities on international law that we think it must be regarded as a rule or principle of the law of war recognized by this Government by its enactment of the Fifteenth Article of War.”
October 19th, 2006 at 2:45 pmAgain, if the Government arrests you and falsely claims you are not a citizen, what rights do you have to challenge that determination? NONE.
“A finding…by a Combatant Status Review Tribual or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense that a person is an unlawful enemy combatant is dispositive for the purposes of jurisdiction for trial by military commission under this chapter.”
That means you cannot challenge that determination, if and when it is made.
And if the Government says a person is an alien, and that person is never allowed a hearing to challenge that determination, you could be locked up for the rest of your natural life, without charges, and subjected to treatment that has already been determined to violate international law.
But Bush can declare that smearing you with your own feces is not degrading; that piling you naked with other detainees is not degrading; that chaining you naked to a dog collar is not degrading; that all of these comport with international law, as he interprets it.
None of the methods used to elicit evidence from detainees is being revealed as a “national security” issue. How will we ever know if detainees are ever tortured? How will we ever know if someone is subjected to the rack, the iron maiden, disembowelment? If someone is injected with drugs? If someone dies in a secret prison? We won’t. That information is “classified.”
Bush now has despotic powers. Only a fool would trust in the benevolence of a dictator. Recall the image of Bush, crawling under his desk in a mock search for WMD’s. THIS is who Congress has given despotic powers to.
October 19th, 2006 at 2:52 pmEx(crement) #65
1) Please define (relative to this so-called war on terror)…
…”a lawful enemy combatant”…
2) Please explain…
…who gets to make that determination?
October 19th, 2006 at 3:15 pmBig Papa, I wonder what motivates a person to make consistently wrong arguments. Is it a desperate need for attention, even negative attention? Or has the person prostituted himself for a paycheck?
In either case, responding merely keeps them coming back for more.
October 19th, 2006 at 3:33 pm#73..Don’t feel bad that I have had to explain all this to you. You are still learning. You’re an amateur.
October 19th, 2006 at 3:38 pmExley, I have to leave early, so I’ll say “Good Night, Good Luck, and Let’s Go Mets” now. I’ll be back tomorrow.
October 19th, 2006 at 3:41 pm#72, Ah….I see (like so many others here) you have not read the legislation.
Here ya go, Slick:
Sec. 948a. Definitions
`(2) LAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- The term `lawful enemy combatant’ means a person who is–
`(A) a member of the regular forces of a State party engaged in hostilities against the United States;
`(B) a member of a militia, volunteer corps, or organized resistance movement belonging to a State party engaged in such hostilities, which are under responsible command, wear a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry their arms openly, and abide by the law of war; or
`(C) a member of a regular armed force who professes allegiance to a government engaged in such hostilities, but not recognized by the United States.
As for who makes that determination, that is the function of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal, which is a military tribunal designed to determine whether an individual is properly detained as an enemy combatant.
If the tribunal determines that he may be detained, then the individual may appeal that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
October 19th, 2006 at 3:44 pm#75 Good night, Jane. Say “hi” to Wayne…Hopefully, we will be celebrating tonight.
LET’S GO METS!!!!!!!!!
October 19th, 2006 at 3:44 pmHis Rune is Wisdom: Reversed. Ironically, that’s the same Rune that came up for President Bush.
Comment by Briseadh+na+Faire
Heh.
October 19th, 2006 at 8:31 pmHey GSD.
The people that endorse your party are like the 140 criminals that Clinton pardoned just before he left office.
You might think first before you throw your stones.
Clinton’s
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pardonchartlst.htm
Bush’s
http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ List_of_people_pardoned_by_George_W._Bush
October 20th, 2006 at 10:02 amDeflated America …….gone.
PMSNBC…………………next.
CBS……………………….next
NBC……………………….next
FOX News……………..Still going strong.
October 20th, 2006 at 10:05 amOops..forgot ABC……….not worth it, no one watches anyway.
October 20th, 2006 at 10:07 am