Monday, April 02, 2007
The Death of Habeas Corpus
I was going to say that I have no idea how this was overlooked by the American people and the American media, but I know exactly how. The breaking of the Mark Foley scandal was timed exactly to cover up the Senate's passing of a Bill giving the President the ability to bypass the Writ of Habeas Corpus. For those who are unaware, bypassing the Writ of Habeas Corpus gives the government the opportunity to hold detainees who have been labeled as "the enemy" for extended periods of time without contact with a lawyer and with no idea when the accused will be granted the right to appear before a judge or receive a fair trial. But let's not talk about impeachment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
When I was growing up, we talked about how evilthe USSR was, because they did such things.
Russia's not doing so well rigt now, either, but at least tey're not pretending. I can't believe that the people of my parent's generation, the cildren of the 60's, are just sitting back and watching this happen without a word.
Never have so many Americans believed so many things tat have been so untrue.
Because we all know that a gay pastor is more important that our constitutional rights... just like a debate about teaching the Bible in public schools is obviously more important to Time magazine than the restructuring of the Taliban in NW Pakistan - out of reach of US troops AND Musharaf!
Funny that I just finished a chapter in The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism by Noam Chomsky that argued that we characterize "terror" and "human rights" however it suits our needs at the moment to allow us to fund terrorists (as we did in Latin America and the Middle East) or fight terrorists (like we are in Gitmo and the Middle East)...
Habeas Corpus has been waived in almost every war. I am not sure about those which preceded the Civil War, but certainly in all those following the Civil War (including the Civil War) except probably the Viet Nam conflict.
The Hippies of the 60's were all too often non-thinking leftist fundamentalists, hence the abuse of soldiers upon their return home. They havent changed, they've just bought a bunch of toys and switched sides.
This shouldnt have been a war. A gang of criminals sucker-punched us, and the Bush Administration used that as a pretext to make an oil/power grab.
Dave, I kind of take exception to that. While it is true that some in the peace movement were abusive toward soldiers, it was by no means universal. In MLK's Vietnam Summer and the other organizations in which I was heavily involved, we considered returning vets a valuable resource for information about the real conditions there. In addition, we considered the troops every bit as much the victims of our irresponsible government as the Vietnamese people. Nobody under my leadership ever treated returning troops with anything but respect.
Okay Tom, I didnt mean to impune all hippies, but I dont think that you can deny that there are those on the left who are just as closed to anything from the right as some from the right are closed to ideas from the left. Liberalism is supposed to be based on reason, but there are those on the left who are just as dogmantic as those on the right.
***
Never have so many Americans chosen to believe so many things that have been so untrue.
Three Score,
It was first waived in the Civil War and people protested it ten. It's ard to protest something tat's done in the middle of the night specifically so that it's buried in the morning. The removal of rights for any reason, including war, is never a good thing. This adminsitration has already proven it's untrustworthy by arresting people for various things under the Patriot Act (anybody remember that?), and they've made it clear that they will do anything they need to get anyting they want.
Laura,
Kind of makes you want to scream, huh??? Like I've said before, the problem now is to know when it's too muc and those of us who do think need to get out while we still can. I love my country and I'd really like to be able to stay in it, but if I think that this isn't what's best for my son, we have to go. My future isn't nearly as important as his.
Dave,
Thanks for the correction. I think that's a good point. The information is out there. Part of the problem is that it's not in a media many people over te age of 55 trust (notice I said many, not all). They have a tenative relationsip with computers at best, and if they only know how to use their email, it's not real likely that they're going to be searching for actual information. People under 30 are so busy using the Internet to make dates that they don't always look anywhere else. Besides all of that, the Internet is a relatively new medium, people have been taught that information is easily manpulated, and it's hard to know which sites to trust.
Post a Comment