Congress are going to pass a bill today, that will change your world

Originally posted by etshrtslr
The ACLU or some other group needs to take this bs law to the supreme court and challenge the constitutionality of it.....hopefully there are still some freedom loving honest judges on the court.

You know we can only expect that it could be done, but ACLU has come under a lot of scrutiny lately about their practices that, It makes you wonder if they only take cases that are beneficial for them while leaving important issues as this one on the back.

This what the executive director of the ACLU has to say about the bill.

"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. Nothing could be further from the American values we all hold in our hearts than the Military Commissions Act."

I guess pretty much what we have been discussing in this thread.

www.aclu.org...

I guess the pursue of the truth will be tramped now that the Bush administration is immune.

Marg, how exactly is the Bush administration immune? They have less than 2 years left to go, and according to the constitution, he has to leave, I am not aware of any ammendmant that allows him to stay in office and the elastic clause does not stretch that far.

As soon as he is out of office and the next president has half a brain, this bill will be repealed. It completely goes against what all Americans stands for and I cannot begin to fathom why Bush would want this bill to begin with.

Shattered OUT...

Look at everything that has led up to this. This goes way back before any Bush took office. We have been slowly taking steps to this goal. We are now standing at the precipice of a dictatorship. Bush has appointed more supreme court justices than any other president.

How do you know when its time to cut your losses, throw everything you have built in your life and run to a more free nation? At one point did all the smart Germans escape before they couldnt? Where is all this going to ultimatly lead, and how are we going to know when it has gone beyond our control? I think it has already.

Think about what life was like in just 1999. A little over a half decade and we have become a dictatorship, our economy is in a shambles and our republic has been ruined. We are seen as the bad guys worldwide and cannot be trusted to do the right thing anymore.

I did not sign up for this. I am an AMERICAN!! Not some follower of a dictatorship! I dont want my tax dollars to be used for torture! I believe in Karma and have a bad feeling if I keep paying taxes knowing where some of those tax dollars are going, I am guilty also. Damn them for doing this to this once beautiful nation.

We have become cowards to let this happen without a fight. History will not reflect well for us all.

Originally posted by marg6043
This what the executive director of the ACLU has to say about the bill.

"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. Nothing could be further from the American values we all hold in our hearts than the Military Commissions Act."

I guess pretty much what we have been discussing in this thread.

www.aclu.org...

I guess the pursue of the truth will be tramped now that the Bush administration is immune.

Its all really disturbing....The administration gives themselves a blanket pardon in the bill.....they gut the constitution and we the sheeple take it all in stride....there are still sheeple in this country that think this is all for the best....they think if you do nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about....remember when patroit act I was passed it was all supposed to be temporary just till the war on terrorism is over.....now 5 years later the war is going stronger than ever it will never be won there will always be terrorist.....so if we always have teorrorist these laws will stand on the books unless or until we the sheeple wake up and fight for our constitutional rights.

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Marg, how exactly is the Bush administration immune? They have less than 2 years left to go, and according to the constitution, he has to leave,

I am kind of confuse here, where does it said in my post that I am talking about Bush staying indefinitely.

That is not what I am referring too.

I am referring to the immunity that Bush is giving to his administration fo wrong doings.

As crimes against humanity or to narrow them against any wrong doings under his administration.

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
As soon as he is out of office and the next president has half a brain, this bill will be repealed. It completely goes against what all Americans stands for and I cannot begin to fathom why Bush would want this bill to begin with.

Why would any administration do that? They are not here to help you, they are here to have power. No politician gets to that point in his/her career unless they are crooked. It is the way the system works, you want enough money to put together a campaign that will win you have to appease your corporate backers.

We have not had a decent human being in the white house since JFK. Face it, the corporations and power hungary people have won today, and because of fear we let them do that.

[edit on 18-10-2006 by LoneGunMan]

Marg, how exactly is the Bush administration immune? They have less than 2 years left to go, and according to the constitution, he has to leave, I am not aware of any ammendmant that allows him to stay in office and the elastic clause does not stretch that far.

According to the constitution! HAHAHAHA. You still believe they care about the constitution? You're in illusions. This law, and everything they did since 9/11 is against the constitution. The 2 following years are gonna be nightmares, and even if there's election, another globalist, Clinton will take office, and it will be as bad as Bush, maybe even worse. Why? Because they are of the same group, republicans and democrats are the same crap, the same corrupt people. It's time for a BIG CHANGE. Democrats won't save this country, only the people can.

I was driving home today and heard this old Don Henley song from 1989.

O beautiful, for spacious skies
But now those skies are threatening
Theyre beating plowshares into swords
For this tired old man that we elected king
Armchair warriors often fail
And weve been poisoned by these fairy tales
The lawyers clean up all details
Since daddy had to lie
But I know a place where we can go
And was away this sin
Well sit and watch the clouds roll by
And the tall grass wave in the wind
Just lay your head back on the ground
And let your hair spill all around me
Offer up your best defense
But this is the end
This is the end of the innocence
Who knows how long this will last
Now weve come so far, so fast
But, somewhere back there in the dust
That same small town in each of us
I need to remember this
So baby give me just one kiss
And let me take a long last look
Before we say good bye

This portion of the song made me start crying thinking about what has been done to our people and our nation. Drivng down the road tears rolling down my jaded old face. After all the suffering I have seen people go though, I didnt think a song could make me cry.

Everything that made our country different and great is dying, isnt it.

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
I was driving home today and heard this old Don Henley song from 1989.


Everything that made our country different and great is dying, isnt it.

Maybe our country never was all that different or great? At least not since men like Revere, Henry, Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Lincoln and their ilk wagered their lives on the dream.

[edit on 10/18/2006 by darkbluesky]

Originally posted by Vitchilo
According to the constitution! HAHAHAHA. You still believe they care about the constitution? You're in illusions. This law, and everything they did since 9/11 is against the constitution. The 2 following years are gonna be nightmares, and even if there's election, another globalist, Clinton will take office, and it will be as bad as Bush, maybe even worse. Why? Because they are of the same group, republicans and democrats are the same crap, the same corrupt people. It's time for a BIG CHANGE. Democrats won't save this country, only the people can.

All we need is someone to take it to court and for the Supreme Court to rule unconstitutional, noone has done that yet.

So yeah, according to the constitution, because no matter what they can't break what's been written in bold on 300 year old paper, they just need someone to stand up and say no.

Shattered OUT...

All we need is someone to take it to court and for the Supreme Court to rule unconstitutional, noone has done that yet.

Hopefully the ACLU will....but also remember tha GWB has put a few of his judges in the supreme court the last few years......Pray they are still freedom loving Americans.

Good grief!...stop it...quit relying on hired news 'experts' to tell you what something "says"...read it for yourselves!

So far this nothing more than a load of political pre-election fear mongering (again).

From the above article by Robert Perry (emphasis added):

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.

Then the language in the remainder of his article is from the act…”Any person” subject or under this chapter etc…

Who is subject?...it is clearly spelled out:

948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by military commission under this chapter.
[url=http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/S-3930_passed.pdf] Act as Passed (pdf.)

That’s it! Nothing more! Not simply “unlawful enemy combatants”…”alien unlawful enemy combatants” specifically…but wait there’s more…

What is the commission’s jurisdiction? (emphasis added):

948d. Jurisdiction of military commissions
‘(a) JURISDICTION.—A military commission under this chapter shall have jurisdiction to try any offense made punishable by this chapter or the law of war when committed by an alien unlawful enemy combatant before, on, or after September 11, 2001.

There it is again “Alien”…that is the only jurisdiction of the commission.

How is “Alien” specifically defined by the act?...wait there is a special offer yet to come….

948a. Definitions
--[snip]--
‘‘(3) ALIEN.—The term ‘alien’ means a person who is not a citizen of the United States.

So the commission only has jurisdiction over “Alien unlawful enemy combatants”…the only persons subject to the chapter as clearly defined under 948c.

OR...Please direct me to where, in case I have missed it, where a US citizen can be tried under military commission as defined by this act...

Note: In August 2002…guess who (just prior to elections) came-out with the exact same discussion on “enemy combatants” and summary citizen rights violations against the administration and the AG’s office….Jonathan Turley…wow…he was convincing people US citizens could/will be placed in camps indefinitely, without trial when labeled "enemy combatants"...lol

Before the argument starts….birthright US citizens can not have their citizenship revoked…period…. in rare cases US naturalized citizens can and have; however all US citizens can voluntarily denounce their US citizenship status.


mg

Don't waste your time MG - I covered this ground two weeks ago. Those who don't want to believe it never will.

Here's my read...

The clause Alex Jones referes to when trying to say US citizens will be subject to this Act begins "Any person subject to this Chapter..."

To review..The Chapter is 47A - Military Commissions (In its entirety)

Now lets go to the Chapter 47A
Subchapter 1 - General Provisions
Section 948b. - Millitary Commissions Generally
Section 948c. - Persons subject to Military Commissions
Section 948d.- Jurisdiction of Military Commissions


External Source

‘‘§ 948b. Military commissions generally
‘‘(a) PURPOSE.—This chapter establishes procedures governing
the use of military commissions to try alien unlawful enemy combatants
engaged in hostilities against the United States for violations
of the law of war and other offenses triable by military commission.


This clearly states the entire chapter applies to ALIEN unlawful enemy combatants (UECs)


External Source

‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by
military commission under this chapter.


Clear enough.


External Source

‘‘§ 948d. Jurisdiction of military commissions
‘‘(a) JURISDICTION.—A military commission under this chapter
shall have jurisdiction to try any offense made punishable by this
chapter or the law of war when committed by an alien unlawful
enemy combatant before, on, or after September 11, 2001.


Again...key word "alien".


So...What's the purpose of Chapter 47A - Military Commissions?
Establishes procedures to deal with ALIEN UECs

What persons are subject to Chapter 47A -Military Commissions?
Alien UECs

Who do the Military Commmissions have jurisdiction over?
You get the theme here.

So Jones's claims of possible unlawful imprisonment of US citizens are false.


Now it does seem that they have included a clause for immunity from being charged for not giving detainess access to legal representation, but only for the suspension of Habeas Corpus as it relates to the other issues (treatment transfer condidtions of detention etc.) not these issues themselves.

I can't blame them.

[edit on 10/18/2006 by darkbluesky]

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Don't waste your time MG - I covered this ground two weeks ago. Those who don't want to believe it never will.

I appriciate the link to the topic.

I find so hard understand simply because this bill has had a tremendous amount of coverage, it stems from a recent SC ruling forced by the left, the floor debate transcripts are public in both houses, reps and senators are a phone call/letter away yet...the "news" contains the truth!... better yet, they will decipher the information for you with so called “experts”.

Amazing…

mg

Originally posted by missed_gear

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Don't waste your time MG - I covered this ground two weeks ago. Those who don't want to believe it never will.

I appriciate the link to the topic.

I find so hard understand simply because this bill has had a tremendous amount of coverage, it stems from a recent SC ruling forced by the left, the floor debate transcripts are public in both houses, reps and senators are a phone call/letter away yet...the "news" contains the truth!... better yet, they will decipher the information for you with so called “experts”.

Amazing…

mg

It is amazing - Earlier, in this very thread, someone (I forget who) cited Jose Padilla as an example of a US Citizen being unlawfully detained. I alerted him that the SC ruled on it, found it uncostitutional and forced the Bush Admin. to formally charge him give him a trial with Full Constitutional Rights afforded him as a US citizen.

The response I recieved was... What? never heard of it. Can you show me proof?

So I linked him to the US SC ruling.

Like you said....Amazing!

Darkbluesky, you didn't answered me...

Not quite - you need to read the first section of the Act - Definitions, Applicability, Purpose etc. The entire Act is Applicable only to "Alien Unlawful Enemy Combatants" see Subchapter 1, section 948b.

You're right that this chapter only refer ``officialy`` to Alien Unlawful Enemy Combattants, but why do they say this:

``(26) WRONGFULLY AIDING THE ENEMY.--Any person(alien, why don't they just say alien if they are the only targeted?) 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, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct.

See, aliens can't breach allegiance nor duty to the US because they are ALIENS, this is pure NON-SENS. Allegiance and duty to the US is strictly for US citizens, it's just evident. So why they use the words ALLEGIANCE and DUTY if it's not aimed at US citizens? Anyway, if they want to declare someone an alien enemy combattant, nobody will stop them.

Also, I found this...

``(B) Evidence shall not be excluded from trial by military commission on the grounds that the evidence was not seized pursuant to a search warrant or other authorization.

So they can take anything against you, even if when they did it, it was illegal.

Also...

(a) IN GENERAL.--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.

NO PERSON. Alien, US citizens, the pope or Bugs Bunny, NO PERSON. And it's not under chapter X, it's under chapter 5: Treaty obligations not establishing grounds for certain claims.

[edit on 18-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

There comes a time when I must wonder what those who excuse everything are thinking. I mean no offense to you, but I must wonder why you constantly excuse the administration like your life depends on it.

Anyone that has not read this document yourself, I highly suggest you do so. The Library of Congress has it on file here.

Now, let's forget everything for a moment. Let's even forget that a constitutional law professor has interpreted this, in public on MSNBC, for all to see.

Tell me, what possible reason is there to include provisions which retroactively pardon an entire administration? I'd like to hear the benevolent "usual" reason for this.

Tell me, what possible reason is there to include provisions which retroactively pardon an entire administration?

Because they know what they did was against every international and domestic laws? Because they want to continue their despotic way of thinking and acting?

Vitchilo and Astygia, I agree with you, like everything in our nation that has to do with laws, regulations and bills, it leaves room to interpretation anyway that it seems at any particular moment needed.

Yes I read the bill and to tell you the truth it does have loopholes.

Nowhere in the bill say that legal American citizens are exempt from been tagged enemy combatants at any time for any reason and never to be tried but by a court of law and with a jury of its peers..

Under aiding leaves the door to anything tag by the government as a terrorist, terrorist group or terrorist action.

Funny, but I will keep my guard on, on this one.

So by any means please if somebody finds anything that contradict what I said bring it on.

An American citizen may not be Alien but it pretty much fit in the category of aiding a terrorist depending what the meaning of a terrorist is at the moment.