October 18, 2006
Bush and Co. suspend Habeus Corpus
In attempt to minimize the “I wasn’t aware of this” responses to my current poll, I want to make sure all my readers have a chance to learn about this incredibly important — and scary — moment in our history. From Wikipedia, “The writ of habeus corpus…is an important instrument for the safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action.” It represents the very cornerstone of our freedom. Without it, we are nothing more than a dictatorship, with leaders who can “lock [someone] up and throw away the key without giving them a chance to prove their innocence in a court of law.”
The new law allows the president or national security adviser to declare a person an enemy combatant, which permits them to be tried in a military court without the writ of habeus corpus. It also allows for “coercive interrogation techniques” and explicitly forbids torture; however, that point is completely moot because the law also says that the same person — the president — also gets to decide what is torture.
By signing this law, Bush has directly violated the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the very foundations of this country. Yet he has “suggested that votes against the law show that Democrats would not protect the country from another terrorist attack” (proving my point about fear mongering in my recent article). Yeah, right. Because you can’t protect us unless you break the law and destroy our democracy, right Mr. Bush? Guess what: by doing so, you’re helping the terrorists win. They hate our way or life and our freedom for all people, no matter what race, gender, or creed. By taking away our freedoms and the basic rights of our democracy, we are playing into the terrorists’ hands in their quest to destroy us. Great work, Mr. President.
Let’s not forget that this bill passed because of the support of most of the Republicans and some Democrat members of the house, so they should be held equally accountable when you go to the polls this year. Not one of these idiots who supported this bill should ever get your vote again. To see who voted which way on the bill, check out the voting record on the Bill of Rights Defense Committee’s web site.
It is very scary to think of what someone could do with this power. The correct language of the new bill..
“No court, justice or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined … to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.”
So pretty much any “terrorist” that is an enemy combatant against the U.S. falls under this. Plus the phrase “awaiting such determination” is also scary because you could be detained for weeks, months without seeing a judge, no questions asked.
But also consider, this same act was put into place after WWII when the Germans, Nazis, were detained and prosecuted. It wasn’t a big deal with then because not one American would have said “you can’t do that” after 300,000 american soldiers were killed by that army. Would a judge most cetainly ruled it was okay? Sure, but could you imagine the thousands of legal battles? Trials would have taken decades.
I am trying to understand why President Bush and so many government officials think this is viable. What I make of it is we don’t want terrorist from other countries who we know are fighting against us to pull a whole bunch of legal maneuvers to get themselves set free and thus we don’t get nay intelligence out of them while we have them in custody.
Do I think it is right to have our government, or the president, determine whether or not a prisoner is allowed the privelages of habeous corpus? No. Do I think terrorists, who are pretty smart believe it or not, could pull off hundreds of illegimate legal battles in courts to stall intelligence and thus pull out another attack on America? Yes.
With the possibility the Iraq war has caused more hatred against America aside, the people out there that are capable of horrific acts such as the events of Sept. 11th, 2001 hate America for the reasons we love it. They dispise the system that gives us the opportunities we have so we can get a great job, raise a family, and drive BMW’s.
A very insightful comment as always, Jeff.
I see your point about not wanting to let the terrorists get off the hook. However, I still don’t think this bill should have been passed, for two reasons.
First, we should be able to convict them without breaking our own laws. If we can’t, then our laws are worthless. If we really NEED this bill, then it means we’re failing somewhere else.
Second, and more of just a supporting point, this administration is the least deserving of this power of any administration in history. You really want Bush, who never listens to anyone outside of his circle of Yes-men/Yes-women, to be the final word on who can be tortured and who can be imprisoned indefinitely without trial?