Neverside

`(e)(1) 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 by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.

___________________

This site is as dead as my website.

I'm going to say right off that I haven't taken the time to read all of the posts in this thread.
Now:

Irregular Times is obviously an OPINION BLOG, which makes it a very unreliable source of information. Someone suggested reading the bill, as do I.

If anyone has ANY common sense (if you're foreign, any knowledge of how our government works), you'll know that what the IT reporter guy (forgot his name already) is being sensationalist here. It's impossible for the government to take away all of these rights.

___________________

Signature Guidelines

Originally posted by love_souljah:

Irregular Times is obviously an OPINION BLOG, which makes it a very unreliable source of information. Someone suggested reading the bill, as do I.

The list of points is a list of facts. (Not to say that it's reliable: bear in mind that facts don't have to be true; they're just believed to be true.) Of course, they could have put a spin on it.

Originally posted by LadyFirelyght:

`(e)(1) 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 by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.

That doesn't bother me so much since it only affects aliens.*

* It's their fault for having three eyes!

___________________

Free-Speed Nation

Last edited by Sykil, October 3rd, 2006 08:30 AM (Edited 4 times)

Originally posted by InvisibleCaper:

That said, denying Geneva Conventions rights is enough to make me wonder "wtf".

InvisibleCaper, the Geneva Conventions was a treaty among nations regarding the treatment of prisoners of war. Terrorists are unlawful enemy combatants, they don't represent any nation or state. Al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization for that matter, does not represent a nation and has never signed the Conventions, let alone abided by them. So even though America has long treated detained terrorists under the Geneva Conventions, strictly speaking the Geneva Conventions have never applied to terrorists anyways. So who gives a flip.

The bill certainly isn't exactly what the Administration wanted, but then what bill is? Many people that have major problems with the bill likely haven't read it, or are too stupid to use common sense. The bill simply protects our President, military personel, etc. from being tried as war ciminals as long as they follow the prisoner interrogation guildlines that have been set fourth by the bill. That was the whole purpose of the bill in the first place. How can one properly interrogate prisoners when the term "cruel and inhuman punishment" can be twisted by idiots from the ACLU into applying to darn near any interrogation method?

My 2 cents.

Last edited by Heri, October 3rd, 2006 08:53 AM (Edited 2 times)

Too bad so many people are being held without charge by the US gov't. One example is an AP reporter in Iraq who's been imprisoned and he's never been told why. It's been something like 6 months. How is that right?

Basically, the gov't can say "This guy's a terrorist", lock him up, and regardless of whether he's ACTUALLY a terrorist or not they can punish him.

___________________

This site is as dead as my website.

For the record, Lydia, the government's been able to do that since WW2. The SC case Ex Parte Quirin pretty much gave it a go. In terms of violations, the most extraordinary example I can think of was 'enemy combatant' status being assigned to 300 black men in New York as an excuse to arrest them after an elderly white woman claimed to have been attacked by a black man.

Policy debate pays off...

Heri: That justifies the actions? You don't see anything hypocritical with Bush's crusade to "spread democracy" being coupled with demolishing rights for those who oppose us?

___________________

Check my title.

Last edited by InvisibleCaper, October 3rd, 2006 07:30 PM (Edited 1 times)

I know that, Brian. I know. And it's just as wrong now as it is then, and yet nobody's doing **** about it.

___________________

This site is as dead as my website.

Heri...you're obviously a republican...If you continue to turn a blind eye to the actions this Administration has commited and will commit, then something is wrong with your...as you put it..."common sense"..

stupid

___________________

Neverside - In Development. Expected Release: Unknown.
Tortustudios.com - In Development. Expected Release: Summer 2006.( You can visit it now)

Quote:

If anyone has ANY common sense (if you're foreign, any knowledge of how our government works), you'll know that what the IT reporter guy (forgot his name already) is being sensationalist here. It's impossible for the government to take away all of these rights.

If you have ANY common sense and a HISTORY of not only OUR government but other governments of the world then you would know that it's not only possible, but it has and still happens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_internment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PATRIOT_Act

Need I go on about the countless years of suppression of black rights?
Or the crap that's currently going on?
OR ALL the crap all other countries have done?

Get real, it's far from impossible. Please don?t fall into this rosy colored dream so many people seem to believe ?Not here in America? because it?s that belief that will be(IS) the down fall of our rights.

Quote:

The bill simply protects our President, military personel, etc. from being tried as war ciminals as long as they follow the prisoner interrogation guildlines that have been set fourth by the bill.

/cry

God forbid fucking checks and balances, that doesn?t seem to be a term this president understands though...

Quote:

The bill certainly isn't exactly what the Administration wanted, but then what bill is?

Then why doesn?t he just pull one of his little (unconstitutional)?signing statements?? Hmm Hmm?
Ohhhh, that?s because the bill gives him everything he wants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement#Controve ... f_signing_statements

___________________

People without self-doubt scare me.
The world is my country, science is my religion. - Christiaan Huygens
“Don’t take refuge in the false security of consensus.”

Home||Truth|Love

Last edited by Tool, October 4th, 2006 06:56 AM (Edited 1 times)

Republican Torture Laws Will Live in History
http://www.alternet.org/rights/42414/