Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

The Revolution WAS Televised

by Antifa Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 10:37:03 AM EST

The Military Commissions Act passed through our American Congress this week, like bacon through a goose.  There are numerous lessons to draw from the way Congress lubricated this excrement out the poop chute, but dwelling on them distracts from the core lesson.

Which is that our Congress actually did it. That this bi-cameral legislative body did indeed pass the Torture R Us Bill, and within a comfortable margin.  They brought down the US Constitution with one shot.

Gentle Reader, if there is a singularity at the core of this great American experiment, and at the core of all Western jurisprudence, if there is a soul at the heart of all Western civilization since the Dark Ages, it is the concept of habeas corpus -- that no human being can be deprived of their liberty without soon facing their accusers, soon seeing the evidence against them, and soon standing trial before a jury of their peers.  That is our true Rock of Ages, and our Congress just threw it out.

from the diaries. - Jerome


The legal phrasing of the Military Commissions Act is so vague, so lacking in definitions and specifics and safeguards, that it applies to literally everyone -- everywhere.  No person, and no class of persons, is ruled out.  Anyone, including every single American citizen, may be deemed a supporter of terrorists or terrorist sympathizers on the word of another person -- and be arrested, imprisoned and tortured on that basis alone, with absolutely no recourse to law, to the courts, or to the norms of the Geneva Convention.

This law applies directly to you.  You can be denounced, and disappear.  Without the guarantee of habeas corpus, you go away without any remedy, without any rights.

All American and Western jurisprudence rests on habeas corpus.  It is the very definition of a free person, upon which all laws regarding free persons then stand.  Without it, all our laws ring hollow.

The difference that losing habeas corpus makes to our Republic is the same as the difference between a man before he is shot, and after he is shot.  The man is still there, afterwards.  But he is no longer there.  The vitality and life is absent; only the shape remains.

Our elected Congress easily and cheerfully threw habeas corpus right out the window this week, which also means they made their own powers and procedures completely irrelevant hereafter.  It means that recovering and reforming from this obscenity upon our legal rights and traditions will not come from within this legislative body.  They think they are incumbent royalty, free to rule and to hand pick their successors -- they have made themselves mere court jesters now, and nothing more.

They are fools who literally know not what they have done.  They may as well have voted out the law of gravity, and yet called themselves wise.  They have destroyed all credibility in their powers to perceive or administer justice especially, and they can never regain their standing.

If this Congress were to come to its senses, and vote habeas corpus back into full effect tomorrow morning, it would have no more meaning than if they also elected habeas corpus Prom Queen, awarded it the Medal of Honor, took it to out to a power lunch, sent its children to college, hung it from a steeple, or put it on parade.  These fools have already demonstrated on national television that they have no grasp of what it is, what it means to our Republic, or what they have done to our Republic by chucking it.  These idiots who did this ridiculous, ridiculous thing clearly haven't the souls or intellects to repair matters, or to know what they've repaired if they should chance to repair it, or be forced to repair it.  These people are beyond irrelevant now -- they are dangerous morons.

There are only two ways to climb out of the latrine Congress has dropped America into:

1) Reform Congress -- change out the persons in this legislative body via elections, or change their behavior via overwhelming public pressure.  We'll call this approach Working Within the System.

2) Remove Congress -- by impeachment, by arrest, by revolution.  By means other than the occasional rigged election.  We'll call this Working Within the Larger System, that system being the inalienable rights of man, the system upon which our original Revolution was founded. That tradition dates as far back as the Magna Carta, back many more centuries than our brief experiment in government sans a King does.

For example, can the Governor of New Jersey have that State's two senators arrested on their return home for the campaign season?  Can they be impeached and then tried in the State legislature for violating the Constitution and their sworn oaths of office?  Can the State legislature strip them of their office, and appoint new representatives who know the American Constitution from a campaign contribution?

If this hasn't been done before, well, it is high time to begin a fine American tradition.  Americans don't live under Kings.

Can your State do the same for their Senators and wayward Congresscritters?  Why in the world not?  There is no question that whichever morons voted this thing through committed treason to their office, to the nation, and to the Constitution.  Those are simple and stark legal facts.  These morons have placed themselves subject to arrest for their crimes overseas and domestically, from now on.  Condoning torture is an international war crime, and crime against humanity, and there is no statute of limitations upon it.

This Republican regime is behaving in ways that clearly reveal that they do not see themselves being the minority party at any future point. This does not mean they are purblind idiots - no, it is much worse than that -- it means that they do not intend to permit the Democratic Party to win at elections, ever again.

That simply can't happen.  Not after the crimes that have been committed and swept under the veil of secrecy.  That can never happen.  Even if it happens, it cannot be permitted.

You may rest assured that this November's election will be another case of widespread electoral theft, just like the previous three.  The Democratic Party will go along with it after some obligatory grumbling, just like after the previous three.  Do you know why?  It is because the Democratic Party is ten times more committed to being seen as playing by the rules, as persons working within the system, than they are to doing what is right, moral, principled, American or even effective.  They are devoted to keeping up appearances and roles and positions, not to democracy.

This was the very cause of death to the Weimar Republic of Germany, whose liberals and democrats held good order, and gave exemplary speeches from their shrinking island of propriety and perspective as gangs of lawless criminals foisted a fascist regime upon them. They did no more than rhetoric and writing, and that is never enough.  To merely speak, to merely write, is to concede to propaganda, to political theater, to bullying and to bluster.  Those are all potent political weapons - speaking and writing of sound reason and grand hope are meandering surrenders compared to them.

Do not look to the Supreme Court to heal this mess.  It will take years to get a challenging case heard at that high level, and even when it is heard and this bill is promptly deemed utterly unconstitutional, the GOP will simply push another version of this bill through, and start the court cycle all over again.  Or, stack the court anew in their favor.

Whatever it takes, because the GOP will be in power for many years to come -- if they are not stopped.  Until they are stopped.  Until they are stopped, they will not cede control of the nation they now rule, not for anything, not for anyone.  Certainly not for the sake of the law.  They are operating well beyond the law already.  They are the law, until they are stopped, and disabused of that notion.

This torture bill is a raw power grab. This bill is a coup.  This bill is treason.  This bill is a revolution because it has overthrown the very cornerstone of all our laws, of our entire Constitution, and of all our international treaties and conventions.  No laws mean anything after their founding principle has been removed.  Congress and the President swore an oath to protect and preserve our Constitution in exchange for our trusting them to handle the day-to-day affairs of our nation.

Yet this coup went out over the airwaves; it was beamed into our living rooms.  It went down with all eyes upon it.  The revolution WAS televised, Mr. Trippi.

It follows that this raw power grab, this legislative coup, is only going to be countered by a raw power grab on the part of the public or by our military refusing to continue violating their own oaths to the Constitution by the following of orders from a treasonous regime.

We are operating beyond the system from here on out, like it or not.  There is no further result or recovery to be obtained by working within the confines of the present corrupted system.  It needs to be stopped, and started again, with new personnel.  In 39 days another national election will be stolen, leaving the GOP in full control, at which point even the most naïve rubes among us will be hard pressed to believe the system still works.  The dimmest bulbs among us will perceive that the spark has gone out of our lives.

For America is not merely a place, or a melting pot, or some ethnic strains, or some culture or language or other discernible feature of this geography or its people. Those are details, not the soul.  The soul of America is an idea.  The bright idea that all human beings are free, equal and subject to whatever laws they choose for themselves.  Take that idea away, and you take away America.

We did not think up this idea.  We got it direct from our European fathers, who had just been through five centuries of unremitting religious wars and still not managed to extricate themselves from bloody-minded theocracy and monarchy.  If America stands for anything, it is the direct and outright rejection of Kings and Priests ruling over the common man.  In passing this torture bill, Congress has stepped way beyond anything we ever authorized them to do.  They had no right, and have no right, to edit our Constitution at their whimsy, or the whimsy of King George.

Harder choices have faced ordinary Americans than we ordinary Americans face today.  We are not lesser people than our ancestors - they, too, had to be roused to righteous anger by the ongoing crimes of despots.  So it will be for us.

The monarchists and theocrats who staged this coup have crossed a bright line in the sand for the vast majority of Americans.  Now we will see whether the Republicans or the free range Americans will win this struggle.

Because it's definitely on, brother.  One species or the other is about to become extinct.

Some things in life we choose.  Sometimes there simply is no choice, no second option provided.  A car wreck, a house burned down, a terminal illness, a King at play with our lives and fortunes -- those kinds of choices, when you find yourself in brand new territory in a heartbeat.  When you say, "No more, by God! No more!"  When you are suddenly thrust into those "times that try men's souls."

Valley Forge.  It was a real place, and a real low point.  Do you know why all those miserable, starving, would be Americans, those shoeless soldiers stayed all winter in their soggy tents and log shelters, back in the first days of our nation?  Do you know why they stayed, suffered, and then re-enlisted almost to a man in the pale light of early spring?

Rather than go home to their wives and children and their own affairs?

Why on earth would they do such a thing?  Why stick?  Why ask for more?

It was because every man there faced a personal choice of going home to live out his days under British tyranny -- under the whims of King George -- or of cleaning that long rifle and going after the Hessians and Redcoats.  Those first citizens of our newly declared Republic could not bear returning home to live under tyranny, and bow down before King George.  They could not go home to their wives and children because they knew their wives and children were not free, but subject to that King and his royal appetites.

When you cannot bear one way of living, you will put up with anything -- including death -- to get something else.  Anything else.  When you cannot bear to see your children living under King George, you stay at Valley Forge, and you sign up for a losing fight even with no pay, and no shoes on your feet.  That's still better than tyranny.

That's exactly where this country came from.

Not from the Bible, and not from quitters.  It came from the hearts of brave, grown up people who would not bow before any King, anywhere, even at pain of death.  The men of Valley Forge considered and made that choice while huddled around their paltry fires and stewpots during that long and bitter winter.  Freedom from a King meant more to them than anything else.

That is the same personal choice facing every American in this ripened Republic of ours, this Republic that is rotting from the top, this Republic that we will not be able to keep, if our GOP despot has his way.  Either we refuse to live under the current and growing tyranny of King George, this treasonous Congress, and this stacked court - or we make ourselves comfortable, teach our kids how to bow before their human lords, and get them ready for endless war, constant surveillance, and Christian theocracy.

If they ask about freedom, shut them up. Tell them it's a fairy tale.

On September 28th, the majority of the members of our Congress broke their individual oaths of office in a wholesale manner, violated our Constitution, transgressed dozens of American and international laws and norms and treaties -- and yet they assume you will get over it, that you'll keep working within the system through election after faked election, that you'll keep hoping to come to some arrangement with King George.

If you do, you are not the stuff this nation was made of.

Display:

No one can do to the US Congress what these knaves and fools do to themselves.

Frames exist within larger frames. Draw a larger frame around your opponent's frame; he will appear wrong or insufficient. This is how wizards play.
by Antifa (antifa@bellsouth.net) on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 09:40:22 AM EST
I was frozen numb from the news, but your passionate piece has flooded me with adrenaline and I will act!

If this is not Rove´s October surprise... what worse terror can he cause??????

For all that is good in the Universe!!!.....  I will fight, I will act religious, if it will undo this harm.


Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.

by metavision on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 01:20:52 PM EST
You have my deepest sympathy, I am worried about where your country is going, I am worried at what might come next for the subjects of King George : You are citzens no more.

As I said in Breakfast this morning ;

When Croesus visited Delphi for omens on attacking Persia he was  told "After crossing the Halys, Croesus will destroy a great empire". Did no-one remember this was a warning, not an encouragement ? I share the dread coming across the Pond that the US has crossed the Halys with this bill.

I read an interesting column in the Indpependent this morning on US Sport. It had a comment about the acquiescence of the US public towards drugs in US sport.

We are, he said, an unbelievably complacent society. We know our President is probably a war criminal and we see baseball players putting on 40lb of muscle during the off-season, yet our president is still in office and those guys are still playing pro baseball.

I confess I watched the riots in Paris with a degree of envy. You can't motivate anyone in this country to protest about anything.



keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 01:34:34 PM EST
The legal phrasing of the Military Commissions Act is so vague, so lacking in definitions and specifics and safeguards, that it applies to literally everyone -- everywhere.  No person, and no class of persons, is ruled out.  Anyone, including every single American citizen, may be deemed a supporter of terrorists or terrorist sympathizers on the word of another person -- and be arrested, imprisoned and tortured on that basis alone, with absolutely no recourse to law, to the courts, or to the norms of the Geneva Convention.

This law applies directly to you.  You can be denounced, and disappear.  Without the guarantee of habeas corpus, you go away without any remedy, without any rights.

I would like to see the actual language of the bill analysed.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 01:47:56 PM EST
Here's the link to the actual text.  Make sure to choose the version labeled "2 .  Military Commissions Act of 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.6166.EH]"

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. -Margaret Mead
by blueneck on Sun Oct 1st, 2006 at 12:00:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I did some googling...

Balkinization: What Hamdan Hath Wrought (September 29, 2006)

...

Viewed from one perspective, [SCOTUS'] Hamdan [decision] was nothing more than a democracy-forcing decision that required the Administration to prove that Congress supported what he was doing. The President pushed through a bill that did just that. Viewed from another perspective, the Military Commissions Bill was nothing less than a smackdown of the Supreme Court; the Congress withdrew habeas review for aliens (and all other forms of review except for the appeals of military commissions and Combatant Status Review Tribunals (CSRTs) mentioned above), limited the enforceability of Geneva, insulated previous and future practices from criminal sanction, and made the President the final interpretive word for non-grave breaches of Common Article 3.

...

Let me repeat what I have just said: The MCA continues to recognize that certain conduct is illegal, but attempts to eliminate all judicial remedies for such violations. That means that if the President violates the MCA, he still fails to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, which is his constitutional duty under Article 2, section 3 of the Constitution. (And in case you are wondering, he might well be guilty of a high crime and misdemeanor, but don't hold your breath.) The President wanted it this way: He wanted to be able to say that he was following the law, but, just in case he wasn't, he didn't want to be held to account for it in any court proceeding. But the fact that the courts can't offer a remedy doesn't mean, I repeat, that the President has no duty to obey the law. And although he now has virtually conclusive authority to interpret non-grave breaches of Geneva, he does not have virtually conclusive authority to interpret either the Bill of Rights or the McCain Amendment.

...

Third, although the MCA attempts to eliminate judicial review, and in particular the writ of habeas corpus, it is by no means certain that it has succeeded. The suspension of habeas may be unconstitutional.

So the President is still accountable, but not to the courts? What is that supposed to mean? That impeachment is the only recourse?

Amnesty: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Military Commissions Act of 2006 - Turning bad policy into bad law (29 September 2006)

Now Congress has passed the Military Commissions Act. Amnesty International will work for the repeal of this legislation which violates human rights principles. Among other things, the Military Commissions Act will:
  • Strip the US courts of jurisdiction to hear or consider habeas corpus appeals challenging the lawfulness or conditions of detention of anyone held in US custody as an "enemy combatant"...
  • Prohibit any person from invoking the Geneva Conventions or their protocols as a source of rights in any action in any US court.
  • Permit the executive to convene military commissions to try "alien unlawful enemy combatants", as determined by the executive under a dangerously broad definition, in trials that would provide foreign nationals so labeled with a lower standard of justice than US citizens accused of the same crimes...
  • Permit civilians captured far from any battlefield to be tried by military commission rather than civilian courts, contradicting international standards and case law.
  • Establish military commissions whose impartiality, independence and competence would be in doubt, due to the overarching role that the executive, primarily the Secretary of Defense, would play in their procedures and in the appointments of military judges and military officers to sit on the commissions.
  • Permit, in violation of international law, the use of evidence extracted under cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or as a result of "outrages upon personal dignity, particularly humiliating or degrading treatment", as defined under international law.
  • Permit the use of classified evidence against a defendant, without the defendant necessarily being able effectively to challenge the "sources, methods or activities" by which the government acquired the evidence...
  • Give the military commissions the power to hand down death sentences, in contravention of international standards which only permit capital punishment after trials affording "all possible safeguards to ensure a fair trial".
  • Limit the right of charged detainees to be represented by counsel of their choosing.
  • Fail to provide any guarantee that trials will be conducted within a reasonable time.
  • Permit the executive to determine who is an "enemy combatant" under any "competent tribunal" established by the executive, and endorse the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT), the wholly inadequate administrative procedure that has been employed in Guantánamo to review individual detentions.
  • Narrow the scope of the War Crimes Act by not expressly criminalizing acts that constitute "outrages upon personal dignity, particularly humiliating and degrading treatment" banned under Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions. Amnesty International believes that the USA has routinely failed to respect the human dignity of detainees in the "war on terror".
  • Prohibit the US courts from using "foreign or international law" to inform their decisions in relation to the War Crimes Act. The President has the authority to "interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions"...
  • Endorse the administration's "war paradigm" - under which the USA has selectively applied the laws of war and rejected international human rights law...
Meanwhile the human rights violations continue. The CIA's secret detention and interrogation program retains the full support of President Bush. During the debates on the Military Commissions Act, members of Congress expressed their support for the program, despite the fact that it violates international law. Thousands of detainees remain in indefinite detention without charge or trial in US custody in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo. In passing the Military Commissions Act, Congress has failed these detainees and their families.

Jurist: 'All the Laws But One': Parsing the Military Commissions Bill (September 25/26, 2006)

In this essay I offer an annotated review of the compromise version [PDF] of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 released late last week. My focus, however, is not on the sections that have so far been the subject of great discussion (classified information, common article 3, habeas corpus, offenses, etc.) but rather on what the compromise drafters are trying to do overall.

It appears that what is going on here is broader than what I have seen described. The compromise drafters appear to be decoupling these military commissions from international law, from domestic courts-martial, from other types of traditional military commissions, from any other law. These alien unlawful enemy combatants, these human beings, are in fact being decoupled from "all the laws but one," in the words of President Lincoln. The power of this effort should not be underestimated because as the lone superpower, the act does no less than push out to the world a state practice that would bring us back to pre-Geneva Convention standards for these people, worthy of only "special process".

...

This, I would suggest, is the essence of the decision that is going to be made this week by this Congress on this legislation. Is America going to declare certain human beings beyond "all the laws but one" depriving them of common levels of human dignity? This type of separation resonates in American history at many points - in the Constitution in its treatment of slaves, in the reservations for Native Americans, in the exclusion of Asians, in the status of women. It resonates in other countries' histories also, such as in the Black Codes in France, the treatment of Algerians by the French and the laws for the overseas territories, the time of apartheid in South Africa, and the Nuremberg Laws in Nazi Germany. These are only some examples and others can think of more ancient historical references (such as who was a citizen of Athens in the days of its empire).

...

It might be possible for some lone Senator or some lone Congressperson to stand up and say "This is too much for mankind. We have fought too long to not create these kinds of special processes." We await that champion of human dignity in all its frailness. My fear is that there is no one.




Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Oct 1st, 2006 at 05:22:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thank you for the link to this excellent analysis.  It always helps to have a legal-beagle look at things, though I submit to you that if you read through the act itself, these things are fairly self-evident.  One has to read the act with a mind to what is NOT there, as well as what is there, though.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. -Margaret Mead
by blueneck on Sun Oct 1st, 2006 at 04:22:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This Republican regime is behaving in ways that clearly reveal that they do not see themselves being the minority party at any future point. This does not mean they are purblind idiots - no, it is much worse than that -- it means that they do not intend to permit the Democratic Party to win at elections, ever again.

Whatever it takes, because the GOP will be in power for many years to come -- if they are not stopped.  Until they are stopped.  Until they are stopped, they will not cede control of the nation they now rule, not for anything, not for anyone.  Certainly not for the sake of the law.  They are operating well beyond the law already.  They are the law, until they are stopped, and disabused of that notion.

If they were to suspend elections I would buy into this view. I believe you're assuming that politicians take future consequences into account when making decisions - I believe history has demonstrated that this isn't the case. I think we're all whipped up over this horrid, horrid bill and are hastily declaring the GOP as fascist dictators. They sure wish, but they're not there yet. They have to worry about polls and November elections. Don't throw away the power you still have as a citizen because you're angry and afraid.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 03:09:03 PM EST
There are only two ways to climb out of the latrine Congress has dropped America into:

  1. Reform Congress...

  2. Remove Congress...

You leave out a third, very important one: challenging the bill in court, on grounds that it is unconstitutional:


"I have no doubt that this is headed for the Supreme Court. Once again, the administration has overreached, and that makes it more likely that the court will strike it down," Stanford University law professor Jenny Martinez said.

...

"I believe that the court will conclude that the habeas-stripping provision is unconstitutional,'' said Eugene R. Fidell, a Washington attorney and military law expert who is president of the National Institute of Military Justice.

...

"Just because Congress puts a stamp of approval on something, it does not necessarily mean it will pass constitutional muster before the Supreme Court,'' said Scott Silliman, a Duke University law professor and executive director at its Center on Law Ethics and National Security.

New York Times: U.S. Terrorism Trials Face Court Challenges

Yes, the court is "stacked", but given such opinions of legal experts, I would still not put it past them to make the right call regarding this bill.

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.

by marco on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 11:36:13 PM EST
Sorry, I missed this paragraph reading through the first time:

Do not look to the Supreme Court to heal this mess.  It will take years to get a challenging case heard at that high level, and even when it is heard and this bill is promptly deemed utterly unconstitutional, the GOP will simply push another version of this bill through, and start the court cycle all over again.  Or, stack the court anew in their favor.

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.

by marco on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 11:38:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
a stirring requiem indeed, and a cautionary, reminiscent, tale for all those of us lucky enough to have fascism in our past, not our future, blair and barroso notwithstanding.

thanks antifa, great penmanship, as usual.

good luck america, that's a hard row you're hoeing...

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 11:38:24 PM EST
Bruce Fein seeks to explain how Lincoln did it "properly", while Bush did not:

Accordingly, on July 4, 1861, Lincoln convened Congress on an "extraordinary" occasion under Article II, section 3, to review his actions. <snip>

With respect to the suspension of habeas corpus without congressional authority, Lincoln elaborated: "<snip> But the Constitution itself is silent as to which [Congress or the Executive] is to exercise the [suspending] power; and as the provision was plainly made for a dangerous emergency, it cannot be believed the framers of the instrument intended that in every case the danger should run its course until Congress could be called together, the very assembling of which might be prevented, as was intended in this case, by the rebellion. ... whether there shall be any legislation upon this subject, and if any, what, is submitted entirely to the better judgment of Congress." Congress retroactively ratified Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus in the Habeas Corpus Act of 1863.

Mr. Bush flouted rather than followed Lincoln's Civil War instruction in the aftermath of September 11.

<snip>

Mr. Bush preposterously claimed inherent constitutional authority to ignore FISA or any other statute constraining his ability to gather foreign intelligence, for example, laws prohibiting mail openings, breaking and entering homes, or torture.

<snip>

In contrast to Lincoln, Mr. Bush did not bring his professed emergency measure to the attention of Congress. Nor did he seek legislation authorizing the NSA's warrantless domestic surveillance, although Congress was present, willing and able to enact anything Mr. Bush proposed as indicated by the overwhelming approval of the Patriot Act.

<snip>

Lincoln unreluctantly sought to act within the rule of law and endorsed checks and balances. Mr. Bush has turned Lincoln's example on its head, thereby endangering the constitutional order. When the nation needed longheaded statesmanship, Mr. Bush sallied forth with small-minded partisanship.



Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
by marco on Sun Oct 1st, 2006 at 12:51:27 AM EST
To make the Constitutional basis explicit:
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

(Article One, section nine).


The Civil War, unlike the terror war, was indeed a Case of Rebellion or Invasion.

Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
by technopolitical on Sun Oct 1st, 2006 at 05:00:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
While I share the shock (and awe) registered above, it has been clear for four years that the Cheney administration absolutely and unconditionally rejects the  Magna Carta, habeas corpus, and most of the Constitituion.  The fact that Congress has now agreed with them means that two branches of government have shredded the Constitution.  This is Act Two.  Not Act One.
by cambridgemac on Sun Oct 1st, 2006 at 01:10:11 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries

DUP decline continues

by Frank Schnittger - Aug 29
16 comments

Islamic State Khorasan Province

by Oui - Aug 24
84 comments

The American Dream

by Oui - Aug 22
29 comments