There goes 60 years of jurisprudence

[judith_s]

We're back to 1942, except this time we are not in war that can be won & the enemy is anyone that the President declares an enemy. Apparently legal residents of the U.S. (like my parents) could be randomly declared "enemy combatants," locked up indefinitely with no right of habeas corpus, no right to be confronted with their alleged "crimes," and with a likelihood of being tortured.

I'm very disappointed in the Democrats for failing to filibuster this abomination of a bill. But more so in the few "moderate" Republicans and Democrats, some of whom spoke out against the bill, who voted for this piece of excrement.

We've never in the history of this country given this much power to a president, to arbitrarily declare the metes and bounds of a treaty, and the identity of the enemy who can be deprived of rights.

Be careful, if you vote the wrong way, you too may be declared an enemy combatant. Apparently selling satellite TV services that include Middle Eastern channels, donating money to a 501(c)(3) that works in the wrong country, or possibly joining the Quakers can get you declared as an enemy combatant these days.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

yes, am pissed, hoping the section in question gets stricken as contrary to association, but even more pissed that it will take a test case to get around to that

[kawgirl.livejournal.com]

Did it pass in the senate?

[judith-s.livejournal.com]

Yup. 65-34. It passed in the House about a week ago. There will be (very minor) reconcilliation needed, and then it's off to Bush.

[kawgirl.livejournal.com]

Feh. Will the courts let it stand, do you think?

[clarkprice.livejournal.com]

If for on other reason than to provide some balance to this mess

You could sign up for :
http://pol.moveon.org/phone/volunteer/c4c.html