Bush to Judge: We Can Send Military Into ANY US Neighborhood-Capture+Imprison Citizens Indefinitely

[kpete]

US residents in military brigs? Govt says it's war
By MATT APUZZO – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — If his cell were at Guantanamo Bay, the prisoner would be just one of hundreds of suspected terrorists detained offshore, where the U.S. says the Constitution does not apply.

But Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri is a U.S. resident being held in a South Carolina military brig; he is the only enemy combatant held on U.S. soil. That makes his case very different.

Al-Marri's capture six years ago might be the Bush administration's biggest domestic counterterrorism success story. Authorities say he was an al-Qaida sleeper agent living in middle America, researching poisonous gasses and plotting a cyberattack.

To justify holding him, the government claimed a broad interpretation of the president's wartime powers, one that goes beyond warrantless wiretapping or monitoring banking transactions. Government lawyers told federal judges that the president can send the military into any U.S. neighborhood, capture a citizen and hold him in prison without charge, indefinitely.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gZEpzY9h9nC5_bSUnGp_wuaB7b3AD90S1R3O0

[Jim__]

1. Under this "interpretation" of the Constitution, the US is a totalitarian country.

A totalitarian country with a little squirt in charge.

[MJJP21]

9. 2nd amendment

There is a reason for the second amendement and it ain't about hunting.

[populistdriven]

21. yea but they have tanks

[guruoo]

43. Ahem....

Soldiers secure the area around an Abrams tank which caught fire
after a roadside bomb hit a U.S. convoy in the center of Baghdad,
on Sunday, according to Iraqi police.

[populistdriven]

44. !

:hurts:

[Prophet 451]

23. Sure, but...

...that was written in the days when a flintlock was the height of military technology. Not to dispute the basic intent but your average hunting rifle isn't a lot of use against a Challenger.

[yorgatron]

36. i've heard both of those before,

nothing like giving up before the fight even starts,huh? :shrug:

the VC kicked our ass with sharpened bamboo stakes.

[Ian_rd]

41. If the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to protect the public from the government, then it has failed

Why would the government fear an armed populace when they can convince the same populace to willingly give up their rights? And for that matter, give them up chest-thumping with pride, chanting "U! S! A! U! S! A!"

As it stands now, that particular purpose of the 2nd Amendment has been neutralized. The reasons for it that remain is for personal protection from law-breakers and from an invading force.

[rhett o rick]

14. Duh! With respect. nm

[tom_paine]

32. What Constitution? Imperial Amerika is an Inverted Totalitarianism ruled by fiat.

Strip away all the bullshit window-dressing from the old days of Free America, and that is exactly what they are.

Of COURSE the Bushies can march into any neighborhood and seize whomever they wish, imprisoning them indefinitely without charge. It's that way is our Sister Nations of Russia and China, too.

And who, exactly, is going to stop the Bushies if Emperor McCain, Emperor Jeb, or Emperor George P. Bush wishes to pursue this reality in a "more aggressive fashion"?

(cue crickets chirping)

Amerika has been a totalitarian nation since 12/12/2000, when Bushler was installed on the throne.

[nichomachus]

2. If you can move out of the US, I advise it

My best friend leaves the day after tomorrow. Two other friends are already gone. If I could, I would join them.

[tbyg52]

3. Where are they going?

(Not that I can leave either, just curious/wistful.)

[nichomachus]

6. Spain and Mexico

Another is planning to get out to Canada, but isn't as far along in his plans.

[neverforget]

8. I'm staying. No 2 bit dictator is taking my country away from me without

a fight.

[nichomachus]

10. Good -- I wish you luck -- to each his own

Seriously. People react in different ways. About a hundred years ago, my grandparents took a good look around where they were and said "This sucks and it isn't going to get any better. They left and came to the US. Life was better for them, for their kids, and, until now, for me."

I don't see any real hope on the near horizon. Electing Obama will be good, but will be the political equivalent of the movie chase scenes where the guy being chased knocks a chair over. It slows the bad guys down, but doesn't stop them.

If you're young and want to stay and fight, do so. I'm old enough that, even if things go well, the country will not be close to functional before I die. In fact, I believe it will get worse before it gets better. My guess is, however, that those who say they want to stay and fight, won't really fight. They'll make some noises, maybe tap out a few words on blogs, at least until a few people do get rounded up by the military. Then, the rest will adapt and adjust -- just as the citizens in the USSR did. There weren't that many dissidents.

[rhett o rick]

15. I have chosen to stay and fight. nm

[nichomachus]

17. Cool. Good luck with that. Do you have any tips for how to do that?

We know posting on blogs, letters to the editor, calling congress, marching in the streets, and voting don't really work. We've been trying that for a decade now.

What are your other suggestions? What will you do if a truck full of soldiers comes to take your neighbor away? Will you go out and confront them -- or will you watch from behind the shade and wonder what he did wrong?

Everybody keeps saying they'll "stay and fight," but never say what that involves.

[rhett o rick]

27. Damn! It sounded so good when I said it. You are right of course. I don't know what to do.nm

[frebrd]

20. If I could move out of the US....

I'd have settled in Canada years ago!

[sarge43]

4. Nacht und Nebel. n/t

[shance]

5. Somehow I'm beginning to wonder WHO exactly is using Bush as their mouthpiece?

Fine, fine.

Bush said this, Bush did that. Bush was at the North Pole detonating a bomb yesterday.

I think we know now that Bush is a puppet - so who are the ones actually ENACTING these violations on our Civil Liberties?

Is anyone else wondering this as well?

Certainly Bush is complicit, but really who's driving the bus? And its not just Dick Cheney.

That's what I continue to wonder.

[WinkyDink]

11. It was true in 1972, and it's true now: Follow the money.

[rhett o rick]

13. I have often asked this same question w/o getting a decent answer. nm

[shanti]

34. that's because

these type of topics are usually forwarded to the dungeon :(

[nichomachus]

19. You don't know -- and you're not supposed to know

There are people who purposely remain in the shadows -- or appear in public in different disguises who run these things.

The problem is that they have developed a perfect cover. The minute someone gets close to piercing the veil, they send out the "tinfoil hat brigade." We even have them here on DU. Come to close to the truth and there will be someone pointing at you and laughing about "tinfoil hats" and getting everyone else to laugh at you too.

Nothing we're seeing in the US today was unexpected. It was predicted by people, many of whom were marginalized and ridiculed.

Cheney is more key to this than you may realize. He has had a dream of an American dictatorship for over 35 years now. This has been his goal.

But the fascists/corporatists (take your pick) have been on this quest since the 1930s. Nothing that has happened since then has been an accident -- or the act of a "crazed lone gunman."

[Union Thug]

30. A small lesson from 1934...

Teamsters. Minneapolis.

But today's American's don't have the 'testicular fortitude."

Nothing changes until the power structure feels threatened - and votes are not threatening.

BTW - good post!

[Hydra]

42. Actually, if you look, you can see them

It's basic psychology- these people have to be invisible to efficiently pull the strings...but they just can't do it completely. Wanting to rule the world is an ego driven thing, and because they don't get the direct ego stroking from being visibly in charge, they have to get it in other ways.

Look to the people who shouldn't be in charge, but when they speak, things happen, despite what anyone else says.

Another nod to hiding in plain sight :evilgrin:

[Prophet 451]

25. Wheels within wheels

I'm not one for macro conspiracies, not least because they're unnecessary but you're looking for a group of people with access to the highest levels of government, money to burn and a complete lack of ethics. We can dismiss the NWO because firstly, it doesn't exist and secondly, the rest of the world has been treated like dogshit by the Bush admin so you can add an "America First" attitude to that as well. Moreover, you don't need a formal conspiracy, just a commonly understood aim.

With that in mind, the PNAC crowd are a good place to start but most of the power players in this would be anonymous paper pushers whose names we would never know.

[electropop]

39. It's the mega-corporations, particularly Big Oil and Big Insurance.

Bush has already taken us to war to bottle up Iraqi oil and boost the price. It's his biggest success.

[librechik]

7. Countdown to US Police State starts now--when the SCOTUS gets this

they will decide our future--Let's hope the cast in there gets some sense, or else this waits for a different court!

[rhett o rick]

16. The countdown started 7 years ago. Just hopin we haven't past the point of no return. nm

[librechik]

18. yes, they've only been flirting hope to god you are right and we can turn this boat around

If we can't I would find it unbelievable, no matter how many historical examples of the process I can recall. Just unbelievable.

[rhett o rick]

26. It's human nature. Where do you draw the line. nm

[WinkyDink]

12. So did LBJ have "war-time powers"?? WTH???? How conveeeenient for Fascism.

[sakabatou]

22. When do we impeach him...?

Oh right, most of the Congress have their tails between their legs.

[lpbk2713]

24. The politics of fear and hysteria.

Where would the GOP be without those two items in their arsenal?

[Marr]

28. We are not at war.

Arguments based around the president's supposed 'wartime powers' are ludicrous, as Congress has not declared war. That line is beneath a response, let alone casual acceptance-- but that's how people frame this issue. It's asinine.

It's yet more ridiculous when you consider that this current administration has claimed the so-called "War on Terror" is something that will never end.

[14thColony]

38. Yes!

Exactly the point! Congress and Congress alone may declare war, and the President's 'war powers' (whatever they may be) do not come into effect until that point. Until then 'commander in chief' is more a ceremonial position than anything else. Congress has the power to raise an army and a navy, to fund them, and to regulate them, so what are these sweeping CinC powers a president has in peacetime when the Consitution did not even envision a standing army at all (possibly a small standing navy, but that's all)? This has been a sham since 1941, the last time Congress upheld its responsibility to decide at what point the US is actually at war.

[T Monk]

29. the full panel can share responsibility for this nazi or help try to put an end to it

[leveymg]

31. SCOTUS rejected this argument in the Hamdan case

Held that the Constitution does apply to prisoners held in US. Hamdan was also being held in the brig in South Carolina.

How is this case any different?

[tom_paine]

33. But if I recall correctly, they left in a "loophole" in the decision that makes it meaningless

Such that each individual "enemy combatant" would have to take their case all the way to the Supreme Court or something like the "if you can get to a courthouse to file the motion, you can get a trial, but oh gosh darn it, you'll never get to a courthouse nor be able to have a lawyer to do so. Too bad."

That's the best I can do, you'll have to research it yourself to pull out the particulars, but I believe my general thesis is essentially correct.

And, of coruse, at bottom remains the fact that Imperial Amerika is in no way a Nation of Laws. rather, as an Inverted totalitarianism it onyl has to invest in a dumbshow to make the idiots THINk it's still a Nation of Laws.

But it is nothing of the sort, and thus Imperial Fiat continues, with very few consmetic exceptions, continues to rule.

In that context, it doesn't matter what SCOTUS decided, even if it didn't leave the lkoophole for their Bushie Masters.

Because the Bush Family gives the orders and SCOTUS obeys, dumbshow not withstanding.

[autorank]

35. k*r The Hon. David Wu of Hawaii said (Sept. 27, 2006):

Congressional Record: September 27, 2006 (House)

Page H7522-H7561

MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT OF 2006

Statement of the Hon. David Wu, (D, OR)

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1042, I call up the bill (H.R. 6166) to amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1042, the amendment printed in House Report 109-688 is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.

The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 6166

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

Mr. WU. Mr. "Speaker, I want to focus like a laser beam on the right of habeas corpus and the untoward effect of this legislation on habeas corpus. This is an ancient doctrine that has been with us since at least the days of Charles I. It has presented difficulties to many American Presidents from Jefferson to Lincoln to Grant to Roosevelt.

'We have the power to do much in restricting habeas corpus; but we should do so very, very carefully because it is the protection from tyranny that our forebears sought in the Revolution.

"Congress here is entering upon dangerous constitutional shoal waters, and it is, in my belief, unconstitutionally limiting access to habeas corpus. The courts have repeatedly ruled in a restricted fashion whenever Congress or the Presidency has restricted access to habeas corpus and each of us, not just the Supreme Court, but we in the Congress and those in the executive branch, we all take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and this act, by restricting habeas corpus, will not serve America well.

"And by so restricting habeas corpus, this bill does not just apply to enemy aliens. It applies to all Americans because, while the provision on page 93 has the word ``alien'' in it, the provision on page 61 does not have the word ``alien'' in it.

"Let us say that my wife, who is here in the gallery with us tonight, a sixth generation Oregonian, is walking by the friendly, local military base and is picked up as an unlawful enemy combatant. What is her recourse? She says, I am a U.S. citizen. That is a jurisdictional fact under this statute, and she will not have recourse to the courts? She can take it to Donald Rumsfeld, but she cannot take it across the street to an article 3 court.

"This bill applies to every American, regardless of citizenship status."

From ARBITRARY DETENTION AND TORTURE
MADE POSSIBLE FOR U.S. CITIZENS THROUGH
SUSPENSION OF HABEAS CORPUS IN
THE "MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT

[Hubert Flottz]

37. Your "Freedom" and "Liberty" are...

"Off The Table!"

[electropop]

40. Impeachment is no longer an option.

It is mandatory for national survival.