Create Your Blog | Sign In
Next Blog

* * * * * totaltruthsciences * * * * *

*** exposing the hidden truth for further educational research only *** CAVEAT LECTOR ***In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.NOTE: Some links may require cut and paste into your Internet Browser.Please check http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2  more real news posts and support the truth! (sorry but don't have time to email all posts)http://blogs.albawaba.com/alexanderjames/   http://blogs.albawaba.com/Alexanderjames/page/linkshttp://www.lulu.com/content/165077; http://www.lulu.com/browse/book_view.php?fCID=165077&fBuyItem=5http://bb.domaindlx.com/alexjames999  

*** Revealing the hidden Truth For Educational & Further Research Purposes only. *** Welcome to Real News Edited excerpts, non-partisan, pro-truth-honesty-peace, and anti-war-lies-crime. The purpose is to expose corruptions, frauds, deceptions, lies, criminal plans, cover-ups and free-speech silencing by powerful people in governments, foundations, corporations and media, which are done using the name of democracy, human rights, false interpretations of religions, cults, occults, patriotism, economy, business, media, elections, justice, charity, etc., and are used to trick the public into hatred & wars and out of their lives, money and freedoms, while the propaganda we are subjected to makes us believe that we have evolved to where such things cannot happen [remember slavery, apartheid…]. Please share what you learn with others who do not have access to the internet. This is only a tip of the iceberg. Stop the hatred that is used to promote the dehumanization of the victims of predatory aggressions;spread the truth;free your mind from being a Zioncon occupied territory of the neo-feudal lords by rejecting the mainstream news propaganda. Caution: real news may induce a kind of schizophrenia because it provides a true vision of reality which is so different from the one we are presented by the mass media spins. Latest real infonews available at alternate news. ***** Check whatreallyhappened . com & other alternative news sites for latest news flashes. In Truth We Trust! The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of the recipient, disseminator or others mentioned in the information. These are offered as a means to stimulate dialogue and discussion.

NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency (NSA) may have read emails without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse, nor protection.......... IF anyone other than the addressee of this e-mail is reading it, you are in violation of the 1st & 4th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Patriot Act 5 & H.R. 1955 Disclaimer Notice: This post & all my past & future posts represent parody & satire & are all intended for entertainment and amusement only.

« | »

21 October, 2006

*Habeas Corpus protection since 1215 Magna Carta killed by Bush in 2006, next Stalinist Concentration Camps in America, remember Chertoff & other chosen ones in charge

We now live in a country where one man, for any reason he sees fit, can have another man or woman picked up off the street and placed in a cell without having to justify it to anyone, including the person imprisoned.

"Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear." - President Harry S. Truman.

"Fascism [corporate feudalism] will come to this country and it will come disguised as Americanism"..........Governor Huey Long

"A Time Comes When Silence Is Betrayal".... Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

The path towards communist feudal takeover of America is being paved by Congress through more and more laws restricting freedom, promoting torture, denying a fair trial, and encouraging indefinite imprisonment without charge, and many of the key players like Chertoff and others in Homeland security have already Soviet KGB experience.

The Man Who Counsels George Bush--Alberto Gonzales http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b246536.html Alberto Gonzales: A Record of Injustice

Habeas Corpus protected citizens against malicious and political imprisonment. No more. You can see now that the War on Terrorism is phony, i.e. it is actually a War on the Innocents to take away their power to spread truth and expose the feudal elite hierarchy that is looting the World, i.e. the World's largest organized crime syndicate for whom the politicians work using the politics of race, religion, etc. to divide and conquer the masses. The end game is total enslavement, i.e. back to the mediaeval days of Stalinism, knaves, serfs, or the days of the enslaving Pharaohs whom the Masons admire.

"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men: " Voltaire. François Marie Arouet (1694-1778)

THE IMPORTANCE OF HABEAS CORPUS http://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htm

 

Habeas Corpus Murdered, Few Notice

Written by Kurt Nimmo   

[Editor's note: The preparations for the 'Machtergreifung' are now complete: all important states are equipped with Diebold vote (mis-)counting machines, the Halliburton-built concentration camps are ready to take millions of political prisoners into 'Schutzhaft', and the laws are passed for the Bush/Cheney administration to declare anyone they want a terrorist so that they can be tortured and sentenced without the possibility to defend themselves against the 'evidence' provided to the court. Not that either Democratic Party or corporate media, both owned by the Kosher Nostra, would mind. They all work for the common cause: Jewish world domination, also known as New World Order.]

Now that Congress, at the behest of Bush’s Schmittian fascist puppetmasters, has nullified habeas corpus, a legal tradition going back to the 12th century, we can concentrate on more important subjects, for instance “space tourist” Anousheh Ansari, who “offers uncommon insight into life on the International Space Station,” in particular “the hazards of washing hair in zero gravity,” according to the Australian.

Shame on Us All

By Robert Parry
October 18, 2006

History should record October 17, 2006, as the reverse of July 4, 1776.

From the noble American ideal of each human being possessing  “unalienable rights” as declared by the Founders 230 years ago amid the ringing of bells in Philadelphia, the United States effectively rescinded that concept on a dreary fall day in Washington.

At a crimped ceremony in the East Room of the White House, President George W. Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 while sitting behind a sign reading “Protecting America.”

On the surface, the law sets standards for harsh interrogations, prosecutions and executions of supposed terrorists and other “unlawful combatants,” including al-Qaeda members who allegedly conspired to murder nearly 3,000 people on Sept. 11, 2001.

“It is a rare occasion when a President can sign a bill he knows will save American lives,” Bush said. “I have that privilege this morning.”

But the new law does much more. In effect, it creates a parallel “star chamber” system of criminal justice for anyone, including an American citizen, who is suspected of engaging in, contributing to or acting in support of violent acts directed against the U.S. government or its allies anywhere on earth.

The law strips “unlawful combatants” and their alleged fellow-travelers of the fundamental right of habeas corpus, meaning that they can’t challenge their imprisonment in civilian courts, at least not until after they are brought before a military tribunal, tried under special secrecy rules and then sentenced.

One of the catches, however, is that with habeas corpus suspended these suspects have no guarantee of a swift trial and can theoretically be jailed indefinitely at the President’s discretion. Given the endless nature of the “global war on terror,” suspects could disappear forever into the dark hole of unlimited executive authority, their fate hidden even from their families.

While incarcerated, the “unlawful combatants” and their cohorts can be subjected to coercive interrogations with their words used against them if and when they are brought to trial as long as a military judge approves.

The military tribunals also could use secret evidence to prosecute a wide range of “disloyal” American citizens as well as anti-American non-citizens. The procedures are similar to “star chambers,” which have been employed historically by absolute monarchs and totalitarian states.

Even after the prosecutions are completed, the President could keep details secret. While an annual report must be made to Congress about the military tribunals, the President can conceal whatever information he chooses in a classified annex.

False Confidence

When Congress was debating the military tribunal law in September, some Americans were reassured to hear that the law would apply to non-U.S. citizens, such as legal resident aliens and foreigners. Indeed, the law does specify that “illegal enemy combatants” must be aliens who allegedly have attacked U.S. targets or those of U.S. military allies.

But the law goes much further when it addresses what can happen to people alleged to have given aid and comfort to America’s enemies. According to the law’s language, even American citizens who are accused of helping terrorists can be shunted into the military tribunal system where they could languish indefinitely without constitutional protections.

“Any person is punishable as a principal under this chapter who commits an offense punishable by this chapter, or aids, abets, counsels, commands, or procures its commission,” the law states.

“Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy [presumably U.S. military allies, such as Great Britain and Israel], shall be punished as a military commission … may direct. …

“Any person subject to this chapter who with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign power, collects or attempts to collect information by clandestine means or while acting under false pretenses, for the purpose of conveying such information to an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a military commission … may direct. …

“Any person subject to this chapter who conspires to commit one of the more substantive offenses triable by military commission under this chapter, and who knowingly does any overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy, shall be punished, if death results to one or more of the victims, by death or such other punishment as a military commission … may direct, and, if death does not result to any of the victims, by such punishment, other than death, as a military commission … may direct.” [Emphases added]

In other words, a wide variety of alleged crimes, including some specifically targeted at citizens with “an allegiance or duty to the United States,” would be transferred from civilian courts to military tribunals, where habeas corpus and other constitutional rights would not apply.

Secret Trials

Secrecy, not the principle of openness, dominates these curious trials.

Under the military tribunal law, a judge “may close to the public all or a portion of the proceedings” if he deems that the evidence must be kept secret for national security reasons. Those concerns can be conveyed to the judge through ex parte – or one-sided – communications from the prosecutor or a government representative.

The judge also can exclude the accused from the trial if there are safety concerns or if the defendant is disruptive. Plus, the judge can admit evidence obtained through coercion if he determines it “possesses sufficient probative value” and “the interests of justice would best be served by admission of the statement into evidence.”

The law permits, too, the introduction of secret evidence “while protecting from disclosure the sources, methods, or activities by which the United States acquired the evidence if the military judge finds that ... the evidence is reliable.”

During trial, the prosecutor would have the additional right to assert a “national security privilege” that could stop “the examination of any witness,” presumably by the defense if the questioning touched on any sensitive matter.

The prosecution also would retain the right to appeal any adverse ruling by the military judge to the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia. For the defense, however, the law states that “no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever … relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military commission under this chapter, including challenges to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions.”

Further, the law states “no person may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas corpus or other civil action or proceeding to which the United States, or a current or former officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the United States is a party as a source of rights in any court of the United States or its States or territories.”

In effect, that provision amounts to a broad amnesty for all U.S. officials, including President Bush and other senior executives who may have authorized torture, murder or other violations of human rights.

Beyond that amnesty provision, the law grants President Bush the authority “to interpret the meaning and the application of the Geneva Conventions.”

In signing the Military Commissions Act of 2006, Bush remarked that “one of the terrorists believed to have planned the 9/11 attacks said he hoped the attacks would be the beginning of the end of America.” Pausing for dramatic effect, Bush added, “He didn’t get his wish.”

Or, perhaps, the terrorist did.

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'

Back to Home Page

Video Link

Military Commissions Act of 2006
or
Our Grandchildren are Going to Hate Us!'
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/MCA-2006.htm

"A Total Rollback Of Everything This Country Has  Stood For"  Sen. Patrick Leahy Blasts Congressional Approval of Detainee Bill

This is a must listen interview The Senate has agreed to give  President Bush extraordinary power to detain and try prisoners in the so-called

war on terror. The legislation strips detainees of the right to challenge their own detention and gives the President the power to detain them indefinitely.

Click to listen. Audio and transcript

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article15161.htm

"The first sign of corruption in a society that is still alive is that the end justifies the means.": Georges Bernanos

"How you can win the population for war: At first, the statesman will invent cheap lying, that impute the guilt of the attacked nation, and each person will be happy over this deceit, that calm the conscience. It will study it detailed and refuse to test arguments of the other opinion. So he will convince step for step even therefrom that the war is just and thank God, that he, after this process of grotesque even deceit, can sleep better:" Mark Twain

"War paralyzes your courage and deadens the spirit of true manhood. It degrades and stupefies with the sense that you are not responsible, that 'tis not yours to think and reason why, but to do and die,' like the hundred thousand others doomed like yourself. War means blind obedience, unthinking stupidity, brutish callousness, wanton destruction, and irresponsible murder." : Alexander Berkman

"It seems that 'we have never gone to war for conquest, for exploitation, nor for territory'; we have the word of a president [McKinley] for that. Observe, now, how Providence overrules the intentions of the truly good for their advantage. We went to war with Mexico for peace, humanity and honor, yet emerged from the contest with an extension of territory beyond the dreams of political avarice. We went to war with Spain for relief of an oppressed people [the Cubans], and at the close found ourselves in possession of vast and rich insular dependencies [primarily the Philippines] and with a pretty tight grasp upon the country for relief of whose oppressed people we took up arms. We could hardly have profited more had 'territorial aggrandizement' been the spirit of our purpose and heart of our hope. The slightest acquaintance with history shows that powerful republics are the most warlike and unscrupulous of nations." : Ambrose Bierce, Warlike America

"COWARDICE, n. A charge often leveled by all-American types against those who stand up for their beliefs by refusing to fight in wars they find unconscionable, and who willingly go to prison or into exile in order to avoid violating their own consciences. These 'cowards' are to be contrasted with red-blooded, 'patriotic' youths who literally bend over, grab their ankles, submit to the government, fight in wars they do not understand (or disapprove of), and blindly obey orders to maim and to kill simply because they are ordered to do so-all to the howling approval of the all-American mob. This type of behavior is commonly termed 'courageous.'" : Chaz Bufe

"In reviewing the history of the English Government, its wars and its taxes, a bystander, not blinded by prejudice nor warped by interest, would declare that taxes were not raised to carry on wars, but that wars were raised to carry on taxes." Thomas Paine


"So let us regard this as settled: what is morally wrong can never be advantageous, even when it enables you to make some gain that you believe to be to your advantage. The mere act of believing that some wrongful course of action constitutes an advantage is pernicious." Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.)

"The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing:" John Adams

******************************

http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/01/stories/2006100104141700.htm

Bush faces wave of challenges to terrorists' trial law, Suzanne Goldenberg Denial of habeas corpusr ight termed unconstitutional


 

Killing Habeas Corpus

During his October 18, 2006 broadcast of MSNBC's Special Report, commentator Keith Olbermann chided President Bush for signing the Military Commissions Act of 2006 into law.

While we certainly don't agree with every detail of Olbermann's commentary, a recent MSNBC news article printed excerpts which we certainly find to be right on target:

We have lived as if in a trance.
We have lived as people in fear.
And now – our rights and our freedoms in peril – we slowly awake to learn that we have been afraid of the wrong thing.
Therefore, tonight, we have become the true inheritors of our American legacy.
For, on this first full day that the Military Commissions Act is in force, we now face what our ancestors faced, at other times of exaggerated crisis and melodramatic fear-mongering:
A government more dangerous to our liberty, than is the enemy it claims to protect us from. http://www.jbs.org/node/1452

On September 28, the U.S. Congress passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA). Though its title refers to military commissions, the new legislation does much more than authorize and establish procedures for military tribunals of foreign terrorist suspects. As Congress’s first comprehensive foray into detainee policy, it affects an array of important issues, including the role of U.S. courts in protecting the fundamental rights of detainees, the implementation of the Geneva Conventions under U.S. law, and the prosecution of abuses by U.S. officials.

usqna1006web.pdf
download PDF (90.8 kibibytes)

Q and A: Military Commissions Act of 2006
http://hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/qna1006/

1.  What are military commissions, and what did Congress authorize in the MCA?
2.  How do the military commissions authorized by Congress differ from those that were struck down by the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld?
3.  Who can be tried by a military commission?
4.  What crimes can by tried by military commissions?
5.  What penalties may military commissions impose?
6.  What commission rules in the MCA are of primary concern?

7.  What is the definition of “combatant” under international law?
8.  What is the definition of “unlawful enemy combatant” under the MCA and how does it comport with international law?
9.  Does the legislation authorize the indefinite detention of anyone who falls within its definition of “unlawful enemy combatant”?

10. How does the MCA impact detainees’ ability to raise claims in U.S. courts regarding their treatment or detention?
11. How do the court-stripping provisions in the MCA change current law?
12. Do these court-stripping provisions violate international law?
13. How does the MCA limit the use of the Geneva Conventions in U.S. courts?

14. How does the MCA change the War Crimes Act?
15. Are the CIA’s most abusive “enhanced” interrogation techniques still criminal under this legislation?
16. Does the MCA immunize U.S. personnel (including CIA personnel) from prosecution for past abuses?
17. Does the legislation authorize torture or other abusive interrogation practices?
18. The legislation gives the president the authority to interpret the “meaning and application” of the Geneva Conventions.  What does this provision mean?

October 2006
http://hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/qna1006/

Molly Ivins: Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006)

With a smug stroke of his pen, President Bush is set to wipe out a safeguard against illegal imprisonment that has endured as a cornerstone of legal justice since the Magna Carta. ...

Published on September 28, 2006 by TruthDig

Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006)

With a smug stroke of his pen, President Bush is set to wipe out a safeguard against illegal imprisonment that has endured as a cornerstone of legal justice since the Magna Carta.

by Molly Ivins

AUSTIN, Texas - Oh dear. I’m sure he didn’t mean it. In Illinois’ Sixth Congressional District, long represented by Henry Hyde, Republican candidate Peter Roskam accused his Democratic opponent, Tammy Duckworth, of planning to "cut and run" on Iraq.

Duckworth is a former Army major and chopper pilot who lost both legs in Iraq after her helicopter got hit by an RPG. "I just could not believe he would say that to me," said Duckworth, who walks on artificial legs and uses a cane. Every election cycle produces some wincers, but how do you apologize for that one?

The legislative equivalent of that remark is the detainee bill now being passed by Congress. Beloveds, this is so much worse than even that pathetic deal reached last Thursday between the White House and Republican Sens. John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham. The White House has since reinserted a number of "technical fixes" that were the point of the putative "compromise." It leaves the president with the power to decide who is an enemy combatant.

This bill is not a national security issue—this is about torturing helpless human beings without any proof they are our enemies. Perhaps this could be considered if we knew the administration would use the power with enormous care and thoughtfulness. But of the over 700 prisoners sent to Gitmo, only 10 have ever been formally charged with anything. Among other things, this bill is a CYA for torture of the innocent that has already taken place.

Death by torture by Americans was first reported in 2003 in a New York Times article by Carlotta Gall. The military had announced the prisoner died of a heart attack, but when Gall saw the death certificate, written in English and issued by the military, it said the cause of death was homicide. The "heart attack" came after he had been beaten so often on this legs that they had "basically been pulpified," according to the coroner.

The story of why and how it took the Times so long to print this information is in the current edition of the Columbia Journalism Review. The press in general has been late and slow in reporting torture, so very few Americans have any idea how far it has spread. As is often true in hierarchical, top-down institutions, the orders get passed on in what I call the downward communications exaggeration spiral.

For example, on a newspaper, a top editor may remark casually, "Let’s give the new mayor a chance to see what he can do before we start attacking him."

This gets passed on as "Don’t touch the mayor unless he really screws up."

And it ultimately arrives at the reporter level as "We can’t say anything negative about the mayor."

The version of the detainee bill now in the Senate not only undoes much of the McCain-Warner-Graham work, but it is actually much worse than the administration’s first proposal. In one change, the original compromise language said a suspect had the right to "examine and respond to" all evidence used against him. The three senators said the clause was necessary to avoid secret trials. The bill has now dropped the word "examine" and left only "respond to."

In another change, a clause said that evidence obtained outside the United States could be admitted in court even if it had been gathered without a search warrant. But the bill now drops the words "outside the United States " which means prosecutors can ignore American legal standards on warrants.

The bill also expands the definition of an unlawful enemy combatant to cover anyone who has "has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States." Quick, define "purposefully and materially." One person has already been charged with aiding terrorists because he sold a satellite TV package that includes the Hezbollah network.

The bill simply removes a suspect’s right to challenge his detention in court. This is a rule of law that goes back to the Magna Carta in 1215. That pretty much leaves the barn door open.

As Vladimir Bukovsky, the Soviet dissident, wrote, an intelligence service free to torture soon "degenerates into a playground for sadists." But not unbridled sadism—you will be relieved that the compromise took out the words permitting interrogation involving "severe pain" and substituted "serious pain," which is defined as "bodily injury that involves extreme physical pain."

In July 2003, George Bush said in a speech: "The United States is committed to worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this fight by example. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes, whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit."

Fellow citizens, this bill throws out legal and moral restraints as the president deems it necessary—these are fundamental principles of basic decency, as well as law.

I’d like those supporting this evil bill to spare me one affliction: Do not, please, pretend to be shocked by the consequences of this legislation. And do not pretend to be shocked when the world begins comparing us to the Nazis

To find out more about Molly Ivins and see works by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www creators.com.

Copyright 2006 TruthDig

Bush's 'interrogation' act takes away rights of every U.S. citizen

Guantanamo Bay just got a whole lot more controversial.

Signed into existence Tuesday, a new bill called the Military Commissions Act of 2006 would allow the government to hold suspected terrorists without the rights of habeas corpus.

Habeas corpus is the right to petition the government for unlawful imprisonment — leaving detainees in places, such as Gitmo, in a legal black hole. President Bush said this bold and new legislation was "fair, lawful and necessary," while the leader of the American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, called it "one of the worst civil liberties measures ever enacted in American history."

"The president can now, with the approval of Congress, indefinitely hold people without charge, take away protections against horrific abuse, put people on trial based on hearsay evidence, authorize trials that can sentence people to death based on testimony literally beaten out of witnesses, and slam shut the courthouse door for habeas petitions," said ACLU executive director Anthony Romero.

Perhaps the ACLU's words would have much less gravity to us if our president had a better track record with human rights — we all remember the chilling stories about Abu Ghraib Prison and Guantanamo Bay. Our memory is seared with the pictures of humiliation and torture, which made us sensitive to the legal rights of detainees.

Now that there is a new development, are we to believe that not only will these people be tortured, but also they are damned to live in these places for two years, three years, 10 years … or more?

Not so, say many of the new bill's adherents. Many point out the bill, while denying habeas corpus and legal counsel, still allows for a military trial. And to further support the bill's just cause, they then point out it bans torture.

A lot of our fears might be calmed by these assurances, but in my case, they are not. I look at these provisions as almost a token gesture to maintain only the illusion of humane treatment. I see that the United Nations has been so displeased with our breaking of human rights, they said Guantanamo should be shut down.

I see that our government claims all military conduct at our prison camps remains consistent with the Geneva Convention — then I see the pictures of the tortured detainees and come to a conclusion: Either our government is lying, or it doesn't know what constitutes torture.

At Abu Ghraib, men were threatened with the prospect of being torn to bits by dogs or told to strip naked and lay on one another to replicate sodomy. At Gitmo, there were stories of the Quran being flushed down toilets and female interrogators threatening the detainees with what they said was menstrual blood.

One of the most brutal tactics used is a technique called "waterboarding," during which detainees are made to believe they are drowning and are shocked intermittently at the same time.

While Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said those techniques are carried out independently of the government and such efforts are in no way condoned, the fact similar tactics are used in two different places across the globe is proof the government is directing these efforts.

Either that, or "great sick minds think alike." Let's face it: The blood, the flushing of the Quran and Abu Ghraib abuse are tactics too intelligently carried out to be mere isolated incidents. They are directed at the psychology of the Middle Eastern culture.

There is a specific definition of "maleness" in Middle Eastern culture, and to use this psychologically against prisoners is a form of humiliation — a humiliation that many argue is, indeed, torture.

But not so, according to critics. They say if there is no long-term damage done to the body, it is not torture. So, what does one have to do in order for it to be torture? Get out the iron maiden and chains? If our government uses the word "torture" so loosely, what credit are we to give it in the term "fair trial"?

I understand the need to question suspected terrorists. In fact, if it were Osama bin Laden or one of his buddies in one of these prisons, I probably couldn't care less. However, the concern is about innocent Americans. Let's say some kid is in the wrong building at the wrong time and is sent to one of these places. He has no right to habeas corpus, no right to legal consultation, can be tortured — and could be there for the greater part of his life. Doesn't this scenario require some sympathy? I would hope so — our government is supposed to be equal and just.

We must do whatever is in our power to catch the terrorists but not at the cost of our own ideals. In hunting the terrorists, we must make sure we do not sink to their level, and that includes through new bills like the Military Commissions Act. After all, as a great mind once said, "If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

Isaac DeVille, an English junior, can be reached at devillei@msu.edu.

http://www.statenews.com/op_article.phtml?pk=38235

Military Commissions Act infringes on Americans' freedom

Sean Ruppert
Staff Writer

On Tuesday, your president signed into law the Military Commissions Act of 2006. This law, among other things, allows him to have anyone suspected of terrorist activity imprisoned without trial indefinitely.

We now live in a country where one man, for any reason he sees fit, can have another man or woman picked up off the street and placed in a cell without having to justify it to anyone, including the person imprisoned.
For the past few years, the neo-conservative Republican Party has been the self-appointed judge of what is and is not patriotic. So I would like to be the first registered Democrat to say that this is the most disloyal and un-American act undertaken by our government since the internment of the Japanese during World War II. Not only has this law betrayed the people of the America, it has betrayed the very ideals that our founding fathers built this nation upon.

Along with voting and freedom of speech, the ability to quickly challenge any imprisonment handed down from our government in a court law, judged by a jury of our peers, is one of the most basic rights that we have. It is part of what made this country a beacon of hope to so many throughout the world, and it is now being chipped away at using fear as a justification.

What this law does, in conjunction with previous legislation, is allow the president to name anyone, including American citizens, an "Unlawful Enemy Combatant," a term applied to anyone working to attack the United States who is not a uniformed member of a national army.

Once this label is applied, the person no longer has the right to petition

Posted by alexanderjames 21:19 | Stay-truly-informed-World-news | Comments Off | Permalink

Comments

 
A service provided by Al Bawaba