What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

End of Habeus Corpus, End of America

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
Bush proposing new legislation that would permit him to throw any American in jail, forever, without a trial or attorney.

THIS is too fucking much!

U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill.

A 32-page draft measure is intended to authorize the
Pentagon's tribunal system, established shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks to detain and prosecute detainees captured in the war on terror. The tribunal system was thrown out last month by the Supreme Court.

Administration officials, who declined to comment on the draft, said the proposal was still under discussion and no final decisions had been made.

Senior officials are expected to discuss a final proposal before the
Senate Armed Services Committee next Wednesday.

more at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060728/ap_on_go_pr_wh/detainee_rights


See what allowing a jerk like the shrub to over reach his authority will get you?

Psychoblues
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,128
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
This isnt anything new. Writs of Habeas Corpus have been suspended during war before. The founders put the ability in the Constitution for a very specific purpose.

And if the libs werent so determined to get terrorists legal protection they have no right to there wouldnt a need to suspend habeas corpus. But rather be flexible and letting us wage the war on terror like it needs to be, you have to give them rights they dont have under American or international law. So now President Bush has to request the suspension of the writ to do what was originally legal. So you only have yourself to blame for this.
 

manu1959

Left Coast Isolationist
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
13,761
Reaction score
1,651
Points
48
Location
california
FDR did it
 
OP
P

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
Who are the "terrorists" that you describe? Convince me that any one of the detainees, American or not, deserves any less than a fair trial as guaranteed by our constitution is not in the American best interests and I might agree. So far, I'm not convinced. The shrub has been over reaching since before the Supreme Court desision that appointed him. He is over reaching now as well. He won't pay a price for it, however. You and I will, like it or not. At least I have eaten from the apple and can objectively remark on it's taste. I don't believe for a moment that you have anything other than blind faith that the apple is good to describe your personal experience with it. You say there are specifics? Spit them out?!?!?!?!?!

Psychoblues





Avatar4321 said:
This isnt anything new. Writs of Habeas Corpus have been suspended during war before. The founders put the ability in the Constitution for a very specific purpose.

And if the libs werent so determined to get terrorists legal protection they have no right to there wouldnt a need to suspend habeas corpus. But rather be flexible and letting us wage the war on terror like it needs to be, you have to give them rights they dont have under American or international law. So now President Bush has to request the suspension of the writ to do what was originally legal. So you only have yourself to blame for this.
 

rtwngAvngr

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
512
Points
48
This IS bullshit. Especially since neocon lunacy has gotten so extreme that simply looking at both sides of the Israeli situation is equated with aiding and abetting terrorism.
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,128
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Psychoblues said:
Who are the "terrorists" that you describe? Convince me that any one of the detainees, American or not, deserves any less than a fair trial as guaranteed by our constitution is not in the American best interests and I might agree. So far, I'm not convinced. The shrub has been over reaching since before the Supreme Court desision that appointed him. He is over reaching now as well. He won't pay a price for it, however. You and I will, like it or not. At least I have eaten from the apple and can objectively remark on it's taste. I don't believe for a moment that you have anything other than blind faith that the apple is good to describe your personal experience with it. You say there are specifics? Spit them out?!?!?!?!?!

Psychoblues

Dude, if you cant even be convinced that Hamdan, Osama Bin Ladens body guard, who conspired with Al Qaeda to commit terrorists acts, is a terrorist then no one on earth can convince you.

There is no right to a civil trial for enemy aliens who attack the United states, or atleast there wasnt until the Supreme Court overreached their authority and decided their was. Sure ignore the fact that the Constitution gives the President executive power as commander in chief to deal with enemies of the state. After all the Constitution doesnt support your argument that "Shrub" is overreaching by exercising his constitutional power to defend us.

You guys do everything you can to undermine the Presidents attempts to defend us, you do everything you can to make it look like the guys trying to kill innocent citizens and children are the victims, and you wonder why it is people wont trust you to defend them.
 

5stringJeff

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2003
Messages
9,990
Reaction score
543
Points
48
Location
Puyallup, WA
As long as this bill doesn't affect American citizens, I'm OK with it.

EDIT: I just re-read the article, which specifically mentions that this is aimed towards American citizens. So (I can't believe I'm typing this) I'm with Psychoblues on this. It's a step too far. Lincoln was wrong for suspending Habeus Corpus, and Bush is wrong for attempting it as well.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
38,736
Reaction score
29,576
Points
2,905
Location
Arizona
Psychoblues said:
Bush proposing new legislation that would permit him to throw any American in jail, forever, without a trial or attorney.

THIS is too fucking much!

U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill.

A 32-page draft measure is intended to authorize the
Pentagon's tribunal system, established shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks to detain and prosecute detainees captured in the war on terror. The tribunal system was thrown out last month by the Supreme Court.

Administration officials, who declined to comment on the draft, said the proposal was still under discussion and no final decisions had been made.

Senior officials are expected to discuss a final proposal before the
Senate Armed Services Committee next Wednesday.

more at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060728/ap_on_go_pr_wh/detainee_rights


See what allowing a jerk like the shrub to over reach his authority will get you?

Psychoblues


Whats got your panties in a bunch? Can't trade propaganda now with your terrorist buddies?
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,854
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
Psychoblues said:
Bush proposing new legislation that would permit him to throw any American in jail, forever, without a trial or attorney.

THIS is too fucking much!

U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill.

A 32-page draft measure is intended to authorize the
Pentagon's tribunal system, established shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks to detain and prosecute detainees captured in the war on terror. The tribunal system was thrown out last month by the Supreme Court.

Administration officials, who declined to comment on the draft, said the proposal was still under discussion and no final decisions had been made.

Senior officials are expected to discuss a final proposal before the
Senate Armed Services Committee next Wednesday.

more at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060728/ap_on_go_pr_wh/detainee_rights


See what allowing a jerk like the shrub to over reach his authority will get you?

Psychoblues

I think you're right. In fact, you should move to another country as soon as you possibly can. Based on your political leanings, I'd say France would welcome you with open arms.
 

pegwinn

Top of the Food Chain
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Messages
2,549
Reaction score
330
Points
98
Location
Texas
Psychoblues said:
Bush proposing new legislation that would permit him to throw any American in jail, forever, without a trial or attorney. Actually it didn't say forever. It said indefinitely in your article. Thanks for sourcing BTW. How is that any different that what is allowed now?

THIS is too fucking much!

U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill.

A 32-page draft measure is intended to authorize the
Pentagon's tribunal system, established shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks to detain and prosecute detainees captured in the war on terror. The tribunal system was thrown out last month by the Supreme Court.

Administration officials, who declined to comment on the draft, said the proposal was still under discussion and no final decisions had been made.

Senior officials are expected to discuss a final proposal before the
Senate Armed Services Committee next Wednesday.

more at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060728/ap_on_go_pr_wh/detainee_rights


See what allowing a jerk like the shrub to over reach his authority will get you?

Psychoblues

This is obvious backlash at the USSC.
 
OP
P

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
At least with me, pegwinn, it is severe disappointment in the present administration for even considering the stifling of the American rights, ideals and principles that I personally have fought so hard to defend. Has my service been in vain?

Psychoblues


pegwinn said:
This is obvious backlash at the USSC.
 

CSM

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
6,907
Reaction score
708
Points
48
Location
Northeast US
Psychoblues said:
At least with me, pegwinn, it is severe disappointment in the present administration for even considering the stifling of the American rights, ideals and principles that I personally have fought so hard to defend. Has my service been in vain?

Psychoblues

In your case...YES!
 
OP
P

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
Please explain or are you too stupid to understand the question?

Think about it, CSM.

Psychoblues




CSM said:
In your case...YES!
 

pegwinn

Top of the Food Chain
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Messages
2,549
Reaction score
330
Points
98
Location
Texas
Psychoblues said:
At least with me, pegwinn, it is severe disappointment in the present administration for even considering the stifling of the American rights, ideals and principles that I personally have fought so hard to defend. Has my service been in vain?

Psychoblues

AS I asked: What is different now? Under the USA Patriot act you could be snatched up by DHS and detained forever. Under FISA you can be spied on. The legislation is backlash against the USSC ruling in Hamden.
 

insein

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2004
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
358
Points
48
Location
Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
5stringJeff said:
As long as this bill doesn't affect American citizens, I'm OK with it.

EDIT: I just re-read the article, which specifically mentions that this is aimed towards American citizens. So (I can't believe I'm typing this) I'm with Psychoblues on this. It's a step too far. Lincoln was wrong for suspending Habeus Corpus, and Bush is wrong for attempting it as well.

Was about to say the same thing. I AGREE with Psycho. Suspending habeus Corpus for US citizens isnt right no matter who does it. If a terrorist somehow gained citizenship through our process and our laws then thats our bad for not checking his background better and thus we have to try him/her as a citizen would be tried.

However, i dont feel that this right should be applied to NON-citizens that mean to harm this country. Enemy combatants should not be given the same rights as US citizens.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,854
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
insein said:
Was about to say the same thing. I AGREE with Psycho. Suspending habeus Corpus for US citizens isnt right no matter who does it. If a terrorist somehow gained citizenship through our process and our laws then thats our bad for not checking his background better and thus we have to try him/her as a citizen would be tried.

However, i dont feel that this right should be applied to NON-citizens that mean to harm this country. Enemy combatants should not be given the same rights as US citizens.

A few minor details you left out ..... one, it's discrimination to ask anyone who looks like a nonresident if they are one. When our own stupid, PC rules hanstring us, it's gut-check time.

"Our bad" cost us 3,000+ US, noncombatant lives.

Terrorists are not "enemy combatants" in the traditional sense. They belong to no organized army, and don't wear uniforms. How is it you intend to distinguish between them and the rest of the criminals in the US? Without violating their rights?
 

insein

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2004
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
358
Points
48
Location
Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
GunnyL said:
A few minor details you left out ..... one, it's discrimination to ask anyone who looks like a nonresident if they are one. When our own stupid, PC rules hanstring us, it's gut-check time.

"Our bad" cost us 3,000+ US, noncombatant lives.

Terrorists are not "enemy combatants" in the traditional sense. They belong to no organized army, and don't wear uniforms. How is it you intend to distinguish between them and the rest of the criminals in the US? Without violating their rights?


Papers please? If they are caught doing illegal things and they dont have proper ID proving that they are citizens, then they receive NO Habeus Corpus. The ones on the planes were NOT US Citizens. I would think that checking student VISAs and making sure they are legit is a #1 priority after that disaster.

We have the means to catch terrorists in this country already. They've been doing it. We dont need to imprison people on "suspicion" because then we might all be in trouble if the wrong guy gets in there. Look into their backgrounds. Check what countries they came from. Check what credentials they used to get here. Just dont throw them in jail while your doing the background check. If your wrong then you'll never be able to stop the army of lawyers.
 
OP
P

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
Forgive gunny, insein. He knows nothing other than UCMJ and has a rather shallow understanding of even that very simple document. All this conversation about actual litigation and court decisions just fucks his mind up.
Americans have rights that their military have no concept of. I'm a first hand witness.

Psychoblues



insein said:
Papers please? If they are caught doing illegal things and they dont have proper ID proving that they are citizens, then they receive NO Habeus Corpus. The ones on the planes were NOT US Citizens. I would think that checking student VISAs and making sure they are legit is a #1 priority after that disaster.

We have the means to catch terrorists in this country already. They've been doing it. We dont need to imprison people on "suspicion" because then we might all be in trouble if the wrong guy gets in there. Look into their backgrounds. Check what countries they came from. Check what credentials they used to get here. Just dont throw them in jail while your doing the background check. If your wrong then you'll never be able to stop the army of lawyers.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,854
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
Psychoblues said:
Forgive gunny, insein. He knows nothing other than UCMJ and has a rather shallow understanding of even that very simple document. All this conversation about actual litigation and court decisions just fucks his mind up.
Americans have rights that their military have no concept of. I'm a first hand witness.

Psychoblues

No matter how ignorant you wish to try and portray me, I'm STILL worlds ahead of you.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$85.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top