It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by dodadoom
I am still smiling and disgusted how far the wool was pulled.
How bout those no bid contracts! Yippe ki yay!
Edit cuz I screwed up trying to write while laughing so hard....
Originally posted by dodadoom
Why not just arrest the six with local and state officers?
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
reply to post by harvib
I don't understand what you mean.
We don't need to give up our rights.
If we have to fight a war on our own soil, whom do you think should fight it? The Boy Scouts?
We know that Cheney was hell-bent on keeping America safe from terror and he was successful.
This is nothing more than a footnote in the history of a very successful administration.
Eventually, war is going to come to the US on such a scale that the use of the military will be necessary.
Well, my liberties have not been infringed at all by any policy that was instituted by the Bush administration.
You should study WWII and learn how much civil liberties were curtailed during that war, not to mention the massive draft, Japanese internment, rationing, and the retooling of civilian industries into war matériel industries.
The Democrats have been trying to deny me my Second Amendment rights for decades. That bothers me.
Originally posted by harvib
Legislation created during the Bush administration made the Bill of Rights nothing but a Bill off privileges.
Would you care to be specific a little less sarcastic?
That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
There is no bar to this Nation’s holding one of its own citizens as an enemy combatant.
Further, we understand Congress' grant of authority for the use of "necessary and appropriate force" to include the authority to detain for the duration of the relevant conflict
If the record establishes that United States troops are still involved in active combat in Afghanistan, those detentions are part of the exercise of "necessary and appropriate force," and therefore are authorized by the AUMF.
concluded that although Congress authorized the detention of combatants in the narrow circumstances alleged in this case, due process demands that a citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decisionmaker.
Each Tribunal shall be composed of a panel of three neutral commissioned officers of the U.S. Armed Forces convened to make determinations of enemy combatant status…
The detainee shall not be represented be legal counsel but will be aided by a Personal Representative…
Each Tribunal shall have a commissioned officer appointed by the Director, CSRT, to assist the detainee in reviewing all relevant unclassified information, in preparing and presenting information, and in questioning witnesses at the CSRT.
Tribunals shall determine whether the preponderance of the evidence supports the conclusion that each detainee meets the criteria to be designated as an enemy combatant.
There is a rebuttalable presumption that the Government Evidence, as defined in paragraph H (4) herein, submitted by the Recorder to support a determination that the detainee is an enemy combatant is genuine and accurate. .
Violates the First Amendment by effectively authorizing the FBI to launch investigations of American citizens in part for exercising their freedom of speech.
Violates the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech by prohibiting the recipients of search orders from telling others about those orders, even where there is no real need for secrecy.
Creates a very serious risk that truly innocent individuals could be deported for association with political groups that the government later chooses to regard as terrorist organizations.
Punishes speech protected by the First Amendment, even of lawful permanent residents. The USA PATRIOT Act permits visitors and immigrants to be found "inadmissible" for advocacy that the Secretary of State determines undermines our anti-terrorism efforts. This could conceivably include speeches, Letters to the Editor, or other comments about the government and its actions.
Violates the Fourth Amendment by allowing foreign intelligence searches for criminal purposes without probable cause of crime.
Violates the Fourth Amendment by failing to provide timely notice to persons whose home has been searched. Notice is also a key element of due process, which is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
Violates the Fourth Amendment by allowing the government to seize records in intelligence and terrorism investigations without probable suspicion that the records pertain to a terrorist, spy or other foreign agent.
Allows indefinite incarceration of persons without judicial review thereby denying due process and equal protection of law.
Creates a very serious risk that individuals could be deported for association with political groups that the government later chooses to regard as terrorist organizations.
There is no bar to this Nation’s holding one of its own citizens as an enemy combatant. In Quirin, one of the detainees, Haupt, alleged that he was a naturalized United States citizen. 317 U.S., at 20. We held that “[c]itizens who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts, are enemy belligerents within the meaning of … the law of war.” Id., at 37—38. While Haupt was tried for violations of the law of war, nothing in Quirin suggests that his citizenship would have precluded his mere detention for the duration of the relevant hostilities. See id., at 30—31. See also Lieber Code, ¶153, Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, Gen. Order No. 100 (1863), reprinted in 2 Lieber, Miscellaneous Writings, p. 273 (contemplating, in code binding the Union Army during the Civil War, that “captured rebels” would be treated “as prisoners of war”). Nor can we see any reason for drawing such a line here. A citizen, no less than an alien, can be “part of or supporting forces hostile to the United States or coalition partners” and “engaged in an armed conflict against the United States,” Brief for Respondents 3; such a citizen, if released, would pose the same threat of returning to the front during the ongoing conflict. [emphasis mine]
It would seem to me that there is precedent for the majority opinion that citizens who are found to be engaged in warfare against the US in concert with a foreign enemy should be treated in the same way that the enemy combatants are treated because the citizen poses the same threat as an alien combatant.
Kudos for a good post, even if I disagree with your position that Bush gutted the Constitution.
The War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal statute set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 2441, makes it a federal crime for any U.S. national, whether military or civilian, to violate the Geneva Convention by engaging in murder, torture, or inhuman treatment.
A quartet of laws has been signed that lays the complete legal foundation for the takeover of our constitutional republic. They are the (so-called) Patriot Act of 2001 (extended in 2005); the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (which allows for the suspension of habeas corpus and the practice of torture and rendition); the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007, which facilitates the declaration of martial law and nullifies posse comitatus by allowing the President to station troops anywhere in the country and to commandeer the National Guard without the consent of local authorities; and, finally, the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed on May 9, 2007, which in the event of a catastrophe would place all governmental authority in the hands of the President.
If the majority of the people and those in congress were required to absorb these truths then the United States and the world would be a much nicer place for everyone. We would not have a runaway government accountable to no one. Runaway inflation at 11+% - unbeknown to most everyone. No Iraq war for lies, oil, power and the bridge to global domination etc...
What about those that have been guilty of war-profiteering, in this "time of war"? George Bush's grand-daddy; Prescott Bush was found guilty of trading with the enemy, and funding the Nazi War Machine during WWII-yet while Prescott was charged and found guilty he did not go to jail-is this how we are going to allow this current crop of New Millennium War Criminals to be treated, or will we ever be able to hold anyone, to any accountability, for anything at all-ever? (1)
Cheney has exactly two things going for him – the lack of a terrorist attack in the past eight years and the prospect of another one. But there's no reason to believe Cheney – who has no qualms about lying and exaggerating for political effect – when he takes credit for the former.
Cheney's only remaining card is another perverse fantasy: to make a public bet that there will be another terrorist attack, at which point he'll get to say "I told you so."
Dick Cheney keeps saying "enhanced interrogation" was used to stop imminent attacks, but evidence is mounting that the real reason was to invent evidence linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaida.
European prosecutors are likely to investigate CIA and Bush administration officials on suspicion of violating an international ban on torture if they are not held legally accountable at home, according to U.N. officials and human rights lawyers.
"Torture is an international crime irrespective of the place where it is committed. Other countries have an obligation to investigate," Scheinin said in a telephone interview from Cairo. "This may be something that will be haunting CIA officials, or Justice Department officials, or the vice president, for the rest of their lives."
Dick Cheney is almost certainly guilty of war crimes for his role in setting up and promoting the policy of torture. Even Colin Powell's former chief of staff thinks so.