I was starting to feel good about the likelyhood this lunacy will be tossed out by the Supreme Court… until I read this.
Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism
Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a definition of “wrongfully aiding the enemy” which labels all American citizens who breach their “allegiance” to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.
After five hours of searching through the 80-plus page bill, Alex Jones, who won the 2004 Project Censored award for his analysis of Patriot Act 2, uncovered numerous other provisions and definitions that make the bill appear as almost a mirror image of Hitler’s 1933 Enabling Act.
In section 950j. the bill criminalizes any challenge to the legislation’s legality by the Supreme Court or any United States court. Alberto Gonzales has already threatened federal judges to shut up and not question Bush’s authority on the torture of detainees.
“No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever, including any action pending on or filed after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military commission under this chapter, including challenges to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions under this chapter.”
The Bush administration is preemptively overriding any challenge to the legislation by the Supreme Court.
In light of Greg Palast’s recent hounding by Homeland Security, after they accused him of potentially giving terrorists key information about U.S. “critical infrastructure” when filming Exxon’s Baton Rouge refinery (clear photos of which were publicly available on Google Maps), sub-section 27 of section 950v. should send chills down the spine of all investigative journalists and even news-gatherers.
The rest of the article has even more startling assertions about the new powers this bill gives the President.
Is it to late to start putting together resistance cells?
What a crock of shit. The bill says no such thing.
A few words come to mind. Unconstitutional, outrageous, unamerican, undemocratic. If the system still works this will be thrown out very soon. My hopes aren’t high.
Are there any lawyers here who can tell us for a fact whether this interpretation is correct or if we’re caught between two types of lying media?
They do seem to be reading more into this bill than is really there. Also, there are links there on that page that show that conspiracy theorists are going to be labeled as terrorists too. I think all of this is again tied into the fantasy world of the 9/11 conspiracy theory nuts.
Or maybe I’m an agent for the White House trying to throw you all off!
for god sakes ALEX JONES???
I can’t believe you would post any of his conclusions. He’s well known for taking things out of context, twisting, and then finally adding his own delusions as dressing.
Like this administration?
I find the debate more than a little amusing…the way I see it..oh..hold on, there’s a knock at the door. BRB
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
… I agree with Shane #6
The definition of torture that the legislation cites is US code title 18 section 2340
You gotta love the expressions George makes.
“The Founding Fathers would be alarmed by President George W. Bush’s “trust me” defense for collecting foreign intelligence in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Constitution’s separation of powers.”
“To borrow from Justice Robert Jackson’s dissent in Korematsu v. United States (1944), the chilling danger created by President Bush’s claim of wartime omnipotence to justify the NSA’s eavesdropping is that the precedent will lie around like a loaded weapon ready for the hand of the incumbent or any successor who would reduce Congress to an ink blot.”
— Bruce Fein
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/nsabriefing/brucefeinarticles12006.pdf
Bruce Fein is a constitutional and international lawyer with Bruce Fein & Associates and The Lichfield Group. He served as associate deputy attorney general under President Ronald Reagan and was a member of the ABA Task Force on presidential signing statements.
Knowing what to worry about is one of the things that separates the smarter among us. When a former US deputy attorney general Bruce Fein is alarmed, then I worry. If another former US deputy attorney general John Dean worries, then I worry. If Thomas Jefferson worries, if Thomas Paine worries, if James Madison worries, then I worry.
As for you guys who say, “what me worry?” Hey, then don’t sweat it dudes. You will be just fine! Everything is fine. Look, you are fine today, therefore you will be fine tomorrow. It is simply logical. Guys like me, Fein, Dean, Jefferson, Madison, Paine, we are just ‘reading into it,’ and you are truly among the smart ones. Yep. That’s the ticket. Sweet dreams….
You can google for John Dean, Bruce Fein, and the founders.
Here is Dean. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/
Everybody knows I am a huge liberal activist but Alex Jones? I used to live in Austin and that clown would be on his cable access show spouting all sorts of nonsense. Aliens are members of our government and stuff like that. It was actually very amusing.
I need another source for this kind of claim or even a chance to read the bill myself.
What we really need now is divided government. You know, so the checks and balances in the Constitution actually work.
Were doomed, get used to it.
Wow. What’s it like to live in a dictatorship?
I need to echo the thoughts of a few others here… This source isn’t credible and I too, am a liberal.
The text of the bill isn’t credible, or the interpretation? If the latter, what is your take on the legislation?
And what will all these neocons think in two years when Hillary is President. Or they all hoping Bush declares martial law and appoints himself dictator for life before that happens?
/agree with #14
For those who continue to inappropriately introduce the idea of “liberal” and “source is not credible”, please read this little offering today right away, lest you find yourself awkwardly removing foot from mouth.
“There are several “Big Brother” bills currently before Congress, and all three would have serious implications for Americans’ constitutionally guaranteed rights and the overall balance of governmental powers: the National Security Surveillance Act (S. 2453), the Terrorist Surveillance Program Act (S. 2455) and the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act (H.R.5825).
These bills would return to the bad old days before enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) when the President enjoyed virtually limitless authority to gather foreign intelligence.
That epoch witnessed, among other things, twenty years of illegal mail openings by the FBI and CIA; twenty years of illegal interceptions of international telegrams by the spy agencies; and, seven years of misuse of the National Security Agency for non-foreign intelligence purposes. The Church Committee’s findings that gave birth to FISA are even more chilling. In sum, the nation has experimented with unchecked presidential power over foreign intelligence, and the experiment proved a disaster.
Remember that on July 31, 2002, the Justice Department informed the Senate Intelligence Committee that FISA did not need amending because the law was nimble, flexible, and capable of foiling terrorist plots in the bud.
The three pending bills are further alarming because they do not dispute, in contrast to FISA, the President’s claim of inherent constitutional power to ignore any law enacted by Congress that constrains his foreign intelligence spying. The bills would thus acknowledge the President’s authority to ignore them with impunity, and would cripple the checks and balances necessary to prevent abuses.
In President Bush’s Kafkaesque world, the Constitution must be destroyed in order to be saved. But in the rational conservative world of the Founding Fathers, the Constitution is best saved by being followed. That means defeating the National Surveillance Act, the Terrorist Surveillance Program Act, and the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act. ”
Former Congressman Bob Barr is chairman of Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances, an organization dedicated to protecting Americans’ fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.
Bruce Fein is an internationally renowned constitutional scholar and former Associate Deputy Attorney General in the Reagan administration. He is one of the six most quoted lawyers on constitutional topics in the nation.
Source:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/9/22/113920.shtml?s=us
I hate Bush as much as the next guy should, but I have to agree, the law does not say anything about “American citizens who breach their “allegiance” to President Bush and the actions of his government.” I notice the writer only quoted the one word, allegiance, because literally that is the only word he quoted. I downloaded the law from the GPO and in section 950v, subsection 26 (as the article says thats where the info came from) specifies Americans who are in “breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States…” that aides the enemy. That does not have anything about the President or his policies.
Also section 950j does not have anything to do with judicial review of the law as the article states. It has to do with judges not being able to overturn the military courts rulings and procedures or apply habeas corpus to those cases. While it does say the results of the military courts cannot be overturned, if the law is struck down so are the protections. I cannot believe that educated lawyers even wrote this nonsense as if it will stand up to review.
This law is a horrific travesty to human rights as it is, do we need to make up stuff as well?
At first recaction from just the quotes, I was in agrement with #3, however upon looking at the constitution, it looks like Congress can do this. From Article III section 2: “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have orginal Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both in Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.“
Doubting the quotations? Read the bill for yourself – it is S.3930 available to the world at http://thomas.loc.gov/
#22: Yes, as long as those regulations passed by Congress do not violate the Constitution. Habeas corpus was around 600 years before the USA. Congress cannot just undo that, except under two circumstances,neither of which apply.
Huh, last time I checked CON-GRESS hasn’t declared war on anyone so they can’t suspend common law!
Although I know this torture & detainment stuff only applies to _ALIENS_… But most of the people in the world are _ALIENS_…
Oh Joy.
Just remember – GWB is the Decider…
Why did he make up that particular word at that time?
He was thinking to himself “I’m the dictator,” and as the
words came out he caught himself and avoided using the
word dictator.
KKKarl Rove is promising an “October Surprise,” so maybe
we can just avoid worrying our “beuatiful minds” with all of
this old “democracy” and “freedom” crap.
Shocking, more Uncle Dave, anti Bush propaganda with intention to create more FUD.
“Huh, last time I checked CON-GRESS hasn’t declared war on anyone so they can’t suspend common law!”
Common law gets overruled plenty of times. The easiest example of this is that most states have done away with common law marriage, because as in most things, they have this strange desire to require licenses for everything. And much of the common law dealing with contracts is now dealt with in the various versions of the UCC that states have enacted.
And what does war have to do with it? All you have to do to overturn a judicial tradition, which is essentially what common law is, is pass a statute.
I’m just shaking my head and trying not to laugh.
As I said yesterday, the law sucks, but most likely will stand. And it doesn’t have any of the crap the nutjob Uncle Dave uses for a reputable source claims.
If your an American citizen or Naturalized citizen you have no worries under this law, unless you actively helping the enemies of the U.S. ….and even then you can’t be brought up on charges under this law, you must be taken through the normal court system with all the protections that American citizens have.
But….all you illegal Canadians better watch your butts…..you is ALIENS!!!
History is a subject of Looking to the past, to identify the stupidity that we TRY to mis-step in the future.
Seeing and learning to See, what led up to What happened, from the past. So we dont Stub our toes on the tables of the future, or bang our heads, or Slit our own throats..
For some ‘God awful’ reason..We seem to forget Everything of the past.
Gorilla warfare:
We did it to the Brits.
Korea and vietnam Did it to US/USA.
Afghanistan and Iraq, are doing it to US/we again.
The rulings of our OWN governement are taking on the SAME controls as those of Rome.
Why do we mention ROME?? Wasnt there any Other great sociaty??
How about looking at what happened in Russia, MANY times..
Alexandria??
France?? 2-3 times in the last 250 years??
Take your pick. He is still the puppet he has ALWAYS been.