Jan 10th, 2012
Showing posts with label detention without trial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label detention without trial. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Gawking At S1867
Dec 13th, 2011
Gawker's Lauri Apple has a great piece on "20 Things You Should Know About America's Most Horrifying Law." Although I have written extensively about the indefinite detention provisions in S1867, I did not know this:
Gawker's Lauri Apple has a great piece on "20 Things You Should Know About America's Most Horrifying Law." Although I have written extensively about the indefinite detention provisions in S1867, I did not know this:
"Texas Republicans have somehow worked sex with animals into all this."
In all seriousness, she has assembled a very thorough set of sources and links.
Friday, December 9, 2011
S1867 - Still In Play, Still A Threat
Dec 9th, 2011
UPDATE: 12/12/2011 The original image we included was found to be tremendously upsetting by some readers (it is available HERE). We think this replacement still makes our point.
It increasingly appears that, one way or another, the covert arrest of American citizens on our own soil and their indefinite detention without trial or open review, dictated by 'classified' officials, will become the "law" of the land, perhaps, along with a return to "enhanced interrogation."
Without the free and open judicial system that was an essential predicate of our founders, this means that the shocking image above and to the left actually could be your father, your son, your wife or even your daughter.
They could be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
For the sake of argument, let's say that some online password to a bank account gets hacked and a few hundred dollars gets transferred to "the enemy." This transfer qualifies, under the pending legislation, as "terrorist support." Let us now admit that investigators, as they so often have done, might get it wrong.
The wrong guy gets followed. The wrong house gets raided. The wrong family's dog gets shot.
It. Happens. All. The. Time.
Now; let's picture an American citizen who has been wronged this badly being denied access to a civil attorney or even a phone.
How can they possibly communicate that they have been unjustly arrested? Or abused? They cannot, potentially, ever.
Within the provisions of the 2012 NDAA, it is more than plausible that an arrest under such circumstances might not be much different than a Chilean disappearance under Pinochet.
Where openness is abandoned, tyranny reigns.
Donny Shaw writes for Open Congress:
"At this point, the House and Senate have both passed their versions of the bill (H.R.1540 andS.1867), but they have disagreement on several provisions, including a provision opposed by the Obama Administration that would require the military to indefinitely detain terrorism suspects, including American citizens living in the U.S., without charge or trial.
With the House having voted 406-17 to “close” portions of the meetings and avoid public scrutiny, members from both chambers and both parties are meeting in a secretive conference committee to work on reconciling the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. On the military detention provision, their main task is going to be to find a solution that can pass both chambers (again) and not draw a veto from President Obama."
We have beaten our heads against the walL trying to draw attention to this madness HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.
UPDATE: 12/12/2011 The original image we included was found to be tremendously upsetting by some readers (it is available HERE). We think this replacement still makes our point.
Without the free and open judicial system that was an essential predicate of our founders, this means that the shocking image above and to the left actually could be your father, your son, your wife or even your daughter.
They could be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
For the sake of argument, let's say that some online password to a bank account gets hacked and a few hundred dollars gets transferred to "the enemy." This transfer qualifies, under the pending legislation, as "terrorist support." Let us now admit that investigators, as they so often have done, might get it wrong.
The wrong guy gets followed. The wrong house gets raided. The wrong family's dog gets shot.
It. Happens. All. The. Time.
Now; let's picture an American citizen who has been wronged this badly being denied access to a civil attorney or even a phone.
How can they possibly communicate that they have been unjustly arrested? Or abused? They cannot, potentially, ever.
Within the provisions of the 2012 NDAA, it is more than plausible that an arrest under such circumstances might not be much different than a Chilean disappearance under Pinochet.
Where openness is abandoned, tyranny reigns.
Donny Shaw writes for Open Congress:
"At this point, the House and Senate have both passed their versions of the bill (H.R.1540 andS.1867), but they have disagreement on several provisions, including a provision opposed by the Obama Administration that would require the military to indefinitely detain terrorism suspects, including American citizens living in the U.S., without charge or trial.
With the House having voted 406-17 to “close” portions of the meetings and avoid public scrutiny, members from both chambers and both parties are meeting in a secretive conference committee to work on reconciling the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. On the military detention provision, their main task is going to be to find a solution that can pass both chambers (again) and not draw a veto from President Obama."
We have beaten our heads against the walL trying to draw attention to this madness HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.
Jon Stewart Takes On S1867
Dec 9th, 2011
Again, on one of the most important issues of our time, the clearest critique comes from a "comedy show."
Again, on one of the most important issues of our time, the clearest critique comes from a "comedy show."
Thursday, December 1, 2011
S1867 - Assaulting Liberty & Codifying Permawar
Dec 1st, 2011
UPDATE: 8:45PM CST - The bill has passed the Senate with the Levin/Mccain provisions intact
A short time ago, a second attempt to counter a dramatic expansion of military power over U.S. citizens here at home was rebuffed. An amendment to the contentious National Defense Appropriations Act (S 1867) proposed by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) failed in a 45 to 55 vote. The threat to long established freedoms continues.
As I wrote earlier this week, when the the first effort to block this un-Constitutional expansion of power failed, there were other proposals to do so. I also wrote that they were no more likely to succeed. With today's renewed fighting, it's time to look this arch redefinition of our system squarely in the eye.
UPDATE: 8:45PM CST - The bill has passed the Senate with the Levin/Mccain provisions intact
 |
| Image via |
As I wrote earlier this week, when the the first effort to block this un-Constitutional expansion of power failed, there were other proposals to do so. I also wrote that they were no more likely to succeed. With today's renewed fighting, it's time to look this arch redefinition of our system squarely in the eye.
Will Obama Veto S1867? cont...
Dec 1st, 2011
William Rivers Pitt wonders is not confident and wonders if we've simply gone too far to turn back and if any President could possibly be principled enough in this climate to do the right thing:
"The dreary fact of the matter is that the slash-and-burn attitude taken towards the US Constitution by the Bush administration did such tremendous damage to the most basic underpinnings of this society that it was widely feared there would be no going back. After all, any politician who has gotten to the point where the office of the President is even a possibility is a politician absolutely drenched in hubris, ego, and a desire for personal power. It cannot be any other way; there are no angels flying in that rarefied atmosphere of American politics, and my rule of thumb for many years now has been that a politician most people have heard of is, to one degree or another, an utter and complete bastard, for only utter and complete bastards have the will and ruthlessness to achieve such heights...and when it comes to presidents and serious presidential contenders, multiply that by a factor of ten. I've met a great many of them on too many campaign trails, and trust me, almost none of them are people you'd like to be stuck in an elevator with, much less allow them to run the country."
William Rivers Pitt wonders is not confident and wonders if we've simply gone too far to turn back and if any President could possibly be principled enough in this climate to do the right thing:
"The dreary fact of the matter is that the slash-and-burn attitude taken towards the US Constitution by the Bush administration did such tremendous damage to the most basic underpinnings of this society that it was widely feared there would be no going back. After all, any politician who has gotten to the point where the office of the President is even a possibility is a politician absolutely drenched in hubris, ego, and a desire for personal power. It cannot be any other way; there are no angels flying in that rarefied atmosphere of American politics, and my rule of thumb for many years now has been that a politician most people have heard of is, to one degree or another, an utter and complete bastard, for only utter and complete bastards have the will and ruthlessness to achieve such heights...and when it comes to presidents and serious presidential contenders, multiply that by a factor of ten. I've met a great many of them on too many campaign trails, and trust me, almost none of them are people you'd like to be stuck in an elevator with, much less allow them to run the country."
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Look, It Goes Beyond Party. PERIOD.
Nov 30th, 2011
The fight against S1867 does go beyond petty concerns of party, much less placating immediate fears; it is a question of existential proportions. Are we to become the enemy we behold in order to continue fighting our enemy?
The fight against S1867 does go beyond petty concerns of party, much less placating immediate fears; it is a question of existential proportions. Are we to become the enemy we behold in order to continue fighting our enemy?
Will Obama Veto S1867?
Nov 30th, 2011
by F. Grey Parker (still not detained... for the time being)
Will the President veto the NDAA now that the Levin/McCain provisions have withstood Sen. Mark Udall's challenge? This is the question. He should. Then again, there are lots of things he hasn't done that he should have.
There are also lots of things he hasn't done that he said he would have.
For as much time as I have spent pushing back against what I call the Other Obama Derangement Syndrome, the nearly irrational liberal opposition, I am not exactly confident.
by F. Grey Parker (still not detained... for the time being)
There are also lots of things he hasn't done that he said he would have.
For as much time as I have spent pushing back against what I call the Other Obama Derangement Syndrome, the nearly irrational liberal opposition, I am not exactly confident.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Addressing Levin and McCain's Apologists
Nov 29th, 2011
An ugly push is being made by those who would see our country pick and choose who is affected by the detention provisions in S1867. They point to this in particular:
From section 1032 which specifically addresses the impositions of 1031
This is not a prohibition on citizen detention. Though it is not a "requirement," it is also not prohibited. It simply means that the detention of citizens and their classification is left to the Executive Branch.
It is worth examining this exchange from today's debate between Sen. Rand Paul (about whom I am proud for the very first time) and Sen. John McCain.
Sen. Paul: "My question would be under the provisions would it be possible that an American citizen then could be declared an enemy combatant and sent to Guantanamo Bay and detained indefinitely."
Sen. McCain: "I think that as long as that individual, no matter who they are, if they pose a threat to the security of the United States of America, should not be allowed to continue that threat."
To represent this as some sort of protection against the arbitrary abuse of expanded war powers is dishonest.
Nevertheless, that argument is now making the rounds. It has no merit.
An ugly push is being made by those who would see our country pick and choose who is affected by the detention provisions in S1867. They point to this in particular:
From section 1032 which specifically addresses the impositions of 1031
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
This is not a prohibition on citizen detention. Though it is not a "requirement," it is also not prohibited. It simply means that the detention of citizens and their classification is left to the Executive Branch.
It is worth examining this exchange from today's debate between Sen. Rand Paul (about whom I am proud for the very first time) and Sen. John McCain.
Sen. Paul: "My question would be under the provisions would it be possible that an American citizen then could be declared an enemy combatant and sent to Guantanamo Bay and detained indefinitely."
Sen. McCain: "I think that as long as that individual, no matter who they are, if they pose a threat to the security of the United States of America, should not be allowed to continue that threat."
To represent this as some sort of protection against the arbitrary abuse of expanded war powers is dishonest.
Nevertheless, that argument is now making the rounds. It has no merit.
The Udall Amendment Fails
Nov 29th, 2011
by F. Grey Parker
The vote on Sen. Mark Udall's (D-CO) amendment to stop the draconian Levin/McCain provisions in S 1867, the annual National Defense Appropriations Act, seemed to move almost in slow motion. With no on screen tally, those of us following at home had to keep track as best we could. It was a mercilessly tense process.
Watching so many American Senators, one by one, vote in favor of undermining our core founding principles was not something I ever thought I would live to see.
And yet, there it was.
That the right to a public hearing, trial by jury and the right to confront one's accusers is even subject to debate illustrates just how close our nation has come to destroying itself in the name of "defense."
In the end, the Udall amendment failed. On a 61 to 37 vote, more of the fabric of our freedom was torn apart.
It is time to contact the White House - 202 4561414 - and demand that President Obama veto this atrocity.
As Commander and Chief, he has the power to keep military pay flowing and continue to fund ongoing operations. He is now all that stands between these fear-mongers and the Constitution.
by F. Grey Parker
Watching so many American Senators, one by one, vote in favor of undermining our core founding principles was not something I ever thought I would live to see.
And yet, there it was.
That the right to a public hearing, trial by jury and the right to confront one's accusers is even subject to debate illustrates just how close our nation has come to destroying itself in the name of "defense."
In the end, the Udall amendment failed. On a 61 to 37 vote, more of the fabric of our freedom was torn apart.
It is time to contact the White House - 202 4561414 - and demand that President Obama veto this atrocity.
As Commander and Chief, he has the power to keep military pay flowing and continue to fund ongoing operations. He is now all that stands between these fear-mongers and the Constitution.
It's Not A Left/Right Issue
Nov 29th, 2011
FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III is deeply alarmed by the Levin/McCain provisions of S1867
FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III is deeply alarmed by the Levin/McCain provisions of S1867
Monday, November 28, 2011
Senators Levin and McCain Channel Orwell
Nov 28th, 2011
by F. Grey Parker
Having spent the greater part of yesterday and today pointing out the fact that the McCain/Levin provisions in the annual National Defense Authorization Act, SB 1867, are among the most serious attacks on due process, trial by jury, habeas corpus and a free society in living memory, it was with more than a degree of revulsion that I read their joint op-ed in the Washington Post a short time ago.
In the land of Levin/McCain, up is down, white is black and, yes, freedom is slavery:
Would you like to know what the Levin/McCain provision would and would not do? Here goes. If enacted, sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA would...
Fact: Explicitly authorize the federal government to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others picked up inside and outside the United States.
Fact: Mandate military detention of some civilians who would otherwise be outside of military control, including civilians picked up within the United States itself
Fact: Transfer to the Department of Defense core prosecutorial, investigative, law enforcement, penal, and custodial authority and responsibility now held by the Department of Justice.
(sourced)
No, no, no, they say. We have it all wrong.
Senators Levin and McCain are clearly a little nervous. They seem to have, over the weekend, become aware that, despite the provisons having been agreed upon in secret committee, educated and activist Americans have actually read them. Their response? Blackmail:
by F. Grey Parker
 |
| Hey, kids! This could soon be YOU! |
In the land of Levin/McCain, up is down, white is black and, yes, freedom is slavery:
"We are concerned that much of the debate over these provisions demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of what this bill would do and attributes to it many things that it would not do."Apparently, if we think something might be amiss, we are guilty of "misunderstanding."
Would you like to know what the Levin/McCain provision would and would not do? Here goes. If enacted, sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA would...
Fact: Explicitly authorize the federal government to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others picked up inside and outside the United States.
Fact: Mandate military detention of some civilians who would otherwise be outside of military control, including civilians picked up within the United States itself
Fact: Transfer to the Department of Defense core prosecutorial, investigative, law enforcement, penal, and custodial authority and responsibility now held by the Department of Justice.
(sourced)
No, no, no, they say. We have it all wrong.
"The most controversial point involves the circumstances under which a terrorist detainee should be held in military, rather than civilian, custody. The bill provides that a narrowly defined group of people — al-Qaeda terrorists who participate in planning or conducting attacks against us — be held in military custody."Ooooh. Well. That's different. Those subject to these provisions are "narrowly defined." They are "al-Qaeda." According to whom?
"It is the executive branch that determines whether a detainee meets the criteria for military custody, under procedures that this legislation allows the executive branch to develop."Got it? That's the "criteria." It's the "executive" who decides. That's it. The "executive," whomever that may be, gets to establish the whole structure for a system of vast new powers with a single pen stroke. The Roman Caesars didn't have it this easy this fast. At least the ancient Roman Senate took substantially longer in times of far greater upheaval to give nearly God-like powers to their despots.
Senators Levin and McCain are clearly a little nervous. They seem to have, over the weekend, become aware that, despite the provisons having been agreed upon in secret committee, educated and activist Americans have actually read them. Their response? Blackmail:
"Congress has passed a defense authorization bill every year for five decades. This year’s bill includes pay raises for our troops, funding for equipment to protect them from roadside bombs, and medical care and other benefits for them and their families. It would be extremely unfortunate if disagreements over these detainee provisions prevented us from passing this bill and fulfilling those duties. But it would be tragic if this happened because of misunderstandings about what the bill says and does."Therefore, if we have reservations about a bill that would provide for the creation of a Gulag culture in America, and in expressing said reservations might hold up the bill, we are being 'anti-troop.'
Of course, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel... and the fascist.
With all due respect, this is evil. This must be stopped. If it is not, it is a nail in the coffin of our country.
The Steady Erosion Of Rights
Nov 28th, 2011
Information on how to act is at the bottom of the post
The U.S. Senate is poised to vote today on S. 1867, the annual National Defense Authorization Act. This year's bill is very different. It is a threat to our fundamental way of life. This is not hyperbole.
There are two provisions contained in the legislation, drafted by Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), which would allow the current and all future Presidents to declare a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil an enemy combatant. Any one of us, for any reason, could be arrested, detained and held indefinitely without charge or trial by our own military.
It is an existential moment for our country. We are now faced with the question of whether or not we are still America. It has been long coming. Many of us have argued since the initial passage of the Patriot Act and the launch of our now more than a decade old state of Permawar that the steady betrayal of our founding principles would eventually lead to just this sort of casual dismissal of the most basic guarantees provided by the Constitution.
Information on how to act is at the bottom of the post
There are two provisions contained in the legislation, drafted by Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), which would allow the current and all future Presidents to declare a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil an enemy combatant. Any one of us, for any reason, could be arrested, detained and held indefinitely without charge or trial by our own military.
It is an existential moment for our country. We are now faced with the question of whether or not we are still America. It has been long coming. Many of us have argued since the initial passage of the Patriot Act and the launch of our now more than a decade old state of Permawar that the steady betrayal of our founding principles would eventually lead to just this sort of casual dismissal of the most basic guarantees provided by the Constitution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
