Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 53

Thread: New law giving the president more power

  1. #1

    New law giving the president more power

    By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
    Tue Oct 17, 6:23 PM ET



    WASHINGTON - Some of the most notorious names in the war on terror are headed toward prosecution after President Bush signed a law Tuesday authorizing military trials of terrorism suspects.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    The legislation also eliminates some of the rights defendants are usually guaranteed under U.S. law, and it authorizes continued harsh interrogations of terror suspects.

    Imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and awaiting trial are Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, Ramzi Binalshibh, an alleged would-be 9/11 hijacker, and Abu Zubaydah, who was believed to be a link between Osama bin Laden and many al-Qaida cells.

    "With the bill I'm about to sign, the men our intelligence officials believe orchestrated the murder of nearly 3,000 innocent people will face justice," Bush said in a White House ceremony.

    The Pentagon expects to begin pre-trial motions early next year and to begin the actual trials in the summer.

    The Supreme Court ruled in June that trying detainees in military tribunals violated U.S. and international law, so Bush urged Congress to change the law during a speech on Sept. 6 in the White House East Room attended by families of the Sept. 11, 2001, victims. He also insisted that the law authorize CIA agents to use tough — yet unspecified — methods to interrogate suspected terrorists.

    Six weeks later, after a highly publicized dispute with key Republicans over the terms of the bill, Bush signed the new law "in memory of the victims of September the 11th."

    "It is a rare occasion when a president can sign a bill he knows will save American lives," Bush said. "I have that privilege this morning."

    Civil libertarians and leading Democrats decried the law as a violation of American values. The American Civil Liberties Union said it was "one of the worst civil liberties measures ever enacted in American history." Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record) of Wisconsin said, "We will look back on this day as a stain on our nation's history."

    "It allows the government to seize individuals on American soil and detain them indefinitely with no opportunity to challenge their detention in court," Feingold said. "And the new law would permit an individual to be convicted on the basis of coerced testimony and even allow someone convicted under these rules to be put to death."

    The legislation, which sets the rules for court proceedings, applies to those selected by the military for prosecution and leaves mostly unaffected the majority of the 14,000 prisoners in U.S. custody, most of whom are in Iraq. It does apply to 14 suspects who were secretly questioned by the CIA overseas and recently moved to the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay.

    The swift implementation of the law is a rare bit of good news for Bush as casualties mount in Iraq in daily violence. Lawmakers are increasingly calling for a change of strategy, and political anxieties are jeopardizing Republican chances of hanging onto control of Congress.

    Bush has been criticizing Democrats who voted against the law, called the Military Commissions Act of 2006, during campaign appearances around the country. He has suggested that votes against the law show that Democrats would not protect the country from another terrorist attack.

    Republican House leaders, in a tough battle to maintain their majority, echoed those criticisms Tuesday in an attempt to get some political points out of the legislation they supported. "The Democratic plan would gingerly pamper the terrorists who plan to destroy innocent Americans' lives," House Speaker Dennis Hastert said.

    Bush noted that the law came amid dispute.

    "Over the past few months, the debate over this bill has been heated, and the questions raised can seem complex," he said. "Yet, with the distance of history, the questions will be narrowed and few: Did this generation of Americans take the threat seriously? And did we do what it takes to defeat that threat?"

    A coalition of religious groups staged a protest against the bill outside the White House, shouting "Bush is the terrorist" and "Torture is a crime." About 15 of the protesters, standing in a light rain, refused orders to move. Police arrested them one by one.

    The legislation says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts. Bush said such measures have helped the CIA gain vital information from terror suspects and have saved American lives.

    After Bush signed the law, CIA Director Mike Hayden sent a note to employees saying it gives them "the legal clarity and legislative support necessary to continue a program that has been one of our country's most effective tools in the fight against terrorism."

    "We can be confident that our program remains — as it always has been — fully compliant with U.S. law, the Constitution and our international treaty obligations," Hayden wrote.

    The White House has said that disclosing the techniques that are used would give the enemy information to resist those techniques. White House press secretary Tony Snow said Bush would probably eventually issue an executive order that would describe his interpretation of the standards, but those documents are not usually made public.

    Snow rejected the idea that Americans should be able to see and judge the standards for themselves, particularly in the aftermath of illegal abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison.

    "The only way accountability doesn't exist is if you believe that the military is not committed to it," Snow said.


    Does this scare the crap out of anybody else?

  2. #2
    I'm liking Feingold for prez in '08.

  3. #3
    Creepy Rat HOFer SkinBasket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Licking, Taco
    Posts
    14,427

    Re: New law giving the president more power

    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    Does this scare the crap out of anybody else?
    Not really, since I haven't been arrested in an Al-Queda terrorist camp in Afganistan shooting up parts of feulselage painted with the words "Air Force One." But that's just me.
    "You're all very smart, and I'm very dumb." - Partial

  4. #4
    I'm not nearly as afraid of terrorists as I am of an executive branch gone power crazy.

  5. #5
    The executive branch has gone crazy since the Wilson administration. You should check out a book on this phenomenon by Jeffrey Tulis, called "The Rhetorical Presidency." Explains how Wilsonian philosophy changed the powers of the executive office. The president does a bunch of stuff that Congress is supposed to be doing, and it's stuck ever since.

  6. #6
    Roadkill Rat HOFer mraynrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    with 11 long-haired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus
    Posts
    47,938
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    I'm not nearly as afraid of terrorists as I am of an executive branch gone power crazy.
    I agree. Any day now, the executive branch will start flying planes into buildings, exploding embassies and ships at harbor, slitting throats on the internet, exploding trains in India, bulldozing villagers alive into water pits in Northern Afghanistan, etc. etc. You can just see it's the next step after the authorization to try terrorists via military tribunals.
    "Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by mraynrand
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    I'm not nearly as afraid of terrorists as I am of an executive branch gone power crazy.
    I agree. Any day now, the executive branch will start flying planes into buildings, exploding embassies and ships at harbor, slitting throats on the internet, exploding trains in India, bulldozing villagers alive into water pits in Northern Afghanistan, etc. etc. You can just see it's the next step after the authorization to try terrorists via military tribunals.
    SUSPECTED terrorists. And now we can use new levels of torture, legally. And, if you're one of these suspects, you can't challenge with a lawyer.

    -Look, I don't want to sound like a super liberal who doesn't realize there are rare occasions where these kind of measures are neccesary. But, it shouldn't be LAW.

  8. #8
    Creepy Rat HOFer SkinBasket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Licking, Taco
    Posts
    14,427
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    -Look, I don't want to sound like a super liberal...
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    I'm liking Feingold for prez in '08.
    Too late.
    "You're all very smart, and I'm very dumb." - Partial

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinBasket
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    -Look, I don't want to sound like a super liberal...
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    I'm liking Feingold for prez in '08.
    Too late.
    C'mon dude, that's just plain stupid. I'm what any REASONABLE person should be, a moderate.

  10. #10
    Roadkill Rat HOFer mraynrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    with 11 long-haired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus
    Posts
    47,938
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha

    SUSPECTED terrorists. And now we can use new levels of torture, legally. And, if you're one of these suspects, you can't challenge with a lawyer.

    -Look, I don't want to sound like a super liberal who doesn't realize there are rare occasions where these kind of measures are neccesary. But, it shouldn't be LAW.
    These guys are getting a lot better than they got in the past. Read up on Elihu Root and his protection of human rights abusers in the late 1800s early 1900s in the Phillipines. Life is a frickin' country club for these vile terrorists compared to the past. And if you think the military is going to treat all SUSPECTED terrorists the same way, you're nuts. The guys that are key players will be grilled but the bit players will probably get Gitmo-like treatment. Maybe some all-nighters, some rap music, and grilled chicken on a bed of rice with fresh fruit.

    Feingold would probably like to give them all Johnny Cockroach and Flea Baily-like attournies and four year long trials, with 28 month senetences, like that traitor lawyer who was trafficking al Quaida messages.
    "Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck

  11. #11
    Roadkill Rat HOFer mraynrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    with 11 long-haired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus
    Posts
    47,938
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinBasket
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    -Look, I don't want to sound like a super liberal...
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    I'm liking Feingold for prez in '08.
    Too late.
    C'mon dude, that's just plain stupid. I'm what any REASONABLE person should be, a moderate.
    If you think Feingold is a moderate, then you know nothing about politics.
    "Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by mraynrand
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinBasket
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    -Look, I don't want to sound like a super liberal...
    Quote Originally Posted by ahaha
    I'm liking Feingold for prez in '08.
    Too late.
    C'mon dude, that's just plain stupid. I'm what any REASONABLE person should be, a moderate.
    If you think Feingold is a moderate, then you know nothing about politics.
    I was talking about myself. Sometimes I vote liberal, sometimes conservative. I was called a super liberal because I said I liked Feingold for president. Although, I do think Feingold is a moderate democrat.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by mraynrand

    I agree. Any day now, the executive branch will start flying planes into buildings, exploding embassies and ships at harbor, slitting throats on the internet, exploding trains in India, bulldozing villagers alive into water pits in Northern Afghanistan, etc. etc. You can just see it's the next step after the authorization to try terrorists via military tribunals.
    So you're only able to see violence and abuse of power when something blows up? The problem w/ military tribunals isn't that terrorists will be put on trial, it's the way the trials are designed. If total secrecy and interrogation methods bordering on torture become the new norms for dealing with terrorism, it doesn't matter how many we convict and put away--terrorism has already won.

  14. #14
    Roadkill Rat HOFer mraynrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    with 11 long-haired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus
    Posts
    47,938
    Quote Originally Posted by hoosier
    Quote Originally Posted by mraynrand

    I agree. Any day now, the executive branch will start flying planes into buildings, exploding embassies and ships at harbor, slitting throats on the internet, exploding trains in India, bulldozing villagers alive into water pits in Northern Afghanistan, etc. etc. You can just see it's the next step after the authorization to try terrorists via military tribunals.
    So you're only able to see violence and abuse of power when something blows up? The problem w/ military tribunals isn't that terrorists will be put on trial, it's the way the trials are designed. If total secrecy and interrogation methods bordering on torture become the new norms for dealing with terrorism, it doesn't matter how many we convict and put away--terrorism has already won.
    Two points. First, what did we do in the past with terrorists and spies? One reason you may not know is the high level of secrecy. As decades old and even century old information becomes available or is scrutinized, it's obvious that spies and terrorists were treated with the harshest methods available, then shot or hung. So we're a hell of a lot nicer now.

    Second, Ahaha wrote that he was more worried by our government than the terrorists. I wrote my sarcasic response to illustrate how absurd that notion is. Terrorism wins when they blow up buildings and trains and frigthen the hell out of civilians. Terrorism wins when an entire culture become accustomed to bombs and other slayings as a part of life, as has happened in Israel. My point of view is that neither of these outcomes are acceptable for the U.S. That's why I think it's necessary to promote change in the middle east and have at least some latitude in dealing with the worst terrorists, at least in the case of the terrorist who knows the location of the ticking bomb, and in the case of terrorists trying to call their buddies in the U.S.
    "Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck

  15. #15
    Opa Rat HOFer Freak Out's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Land of the midnight sun
    Posts
    15,405
    The legislation that the president signed into law will not make it out of the courts. It's an embarrassment and was rammed through without enough thought and debate. Congress is a joke. It is easily the most corrupt since the gilded age and has done nothing worth noting. I won’t even get going on the President, he’ll be gone in a few years and hopefully the damage he can still do will be minimized by a new Congress. Doubtful though.
    C.H.U.D.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by mraynrand

    First, what did we do in the past with terrorists and spies? One reason you may not know is the high level of secrecy. As decades old and even century old information becomes available or is scrutinized, it's obvious that spies and terrorists were treated with the harshest methods available, then shot or hung. So we're a hell of a lot nicer now.
    I don't get it. Countries used to draw and quarter traitors so now we should feel all warm and cozy because we stop short of killing them? Old histories of barbarism can't be used to justify new, kinder and gentler barbarisms.

    Quote Originally Posted by mraynrand

    Second, Ahaha wrote that he was more worried by our government than the terrorists. I wrote my sarcasic response to illustrate how absurd that notion is.
    Why is that notion absurd? Is a terrorist attack really more damaging to democracy in the long run than a government with no respect for civil liberaties and human rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by mraynrand

    That's why I think it's necessary to promote change in the middle east and have at least some latitude in dealing with the worst terrorists, at least in the case of the terrorist who knows the location of the ticking bomb, and in the case of terrorists trying to call their buddies in the U.S.

    "The terrorist who knows" argument is a red herring and a cheap appeal to emotion in order to win blanket approval for tactics that would never otherwise see the light of day.

  17. #17
    Without making any *value* judgments about liberal/moderate/conservative...

    The last "liberal" president, rhetorically speaking, was LBJ. I scoff at the notion of any current elected official as "liberal."

    Not to mention that all elected officials are pro-capitalism (hence, not *really* liberal, if you want to discuss semantics) but that's a can of worms I don't especially care to discuss.

    Why the hell am I posting, then??

  18. #18
    Creepy Rat HOFer SkinBasket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Licking, Taco
    Posts
    14,427
    Quote Originally Posted by hoosier
    I don't get it. Countries used to draw and quarter traitors so now we should feel all warm and cozy because we stop short of killing them? Old histories of barbarism can't be used to justify new, kinder and gentler barbarisms.
    You're right. Keeping someone who would wipe out every non-muslim on the face of the planet without a second thought awake for a day straight with loud rap music in a carefully controlled environment under specific humanitrian conditions is terribly barbaric.

    Quote Originally Posted by hoosier
    Why is that notion absurd? Is a terrorist attack really more damaging to democracy in the long run than a government with no respect for civil liberaties and human rights?
    Exactly who's "civil liberties and human rights" does this bill erode again? Maybe one of you guys wringing your hands over this could give us one example of how this bill effects your civil liberties or infringes on your human rights.
    "You're all very smart, and I'm very dumb." - Partial

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinBasket
    You're right. Keeping someone who would wipe out every non-muslim on the face of the planet without a second thought awake for a day straight with loud rap music in a carefully controlled environment under specific humanitrian conditions is terribly barbaric.
    First off, a significant percentage of people detained at Gitmo have turned out to have nothing to do with terrorism, Taliban, etc. Bummer for them. Second, what exactly is a "carefully controlled environment under specific humanitarian conditions"? Prolonged sleep deprivation, simulated suffocation--it does sound controlled, but doesn't quite have a humanitiarian ring to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by SkinBasket
    Exactly who's "civil liberties and human rights" does this bill erode again? Maybe one of you guys wringing your hands over this could give us one example of how this bill effects your civil liberties or infringes on your human rights.
    Since the power to designate someone as "enemy combatant" is totally arbitrary, it theoretically affects any and all of us. But that's not my point. My point is, as soon as we begin to differentiate between people who have full rights and people who don't (or people who aren't fully human), our democratic tradition has died. And since US citizens are very likely to be processed under this bill if it doesn't get struck down, one can't get off the hook arguing that it only affects people not protected by the US constitution.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinBasket
    Quote Originally Posted by hoosier
    I don't get it. Countries used to draw and quarter traitors so now we should feel all warm and cozy because we stop short of killing them? Old histories of barbarism can't be used to justify new, kinder and gentler barbarisms.
    You're right. Keeping someone who would wipe out every non-muslim on the face of the planet without a second thought awake for a day straight with loud rap music in a carefully controlled environment under specific humanitrian conditions is terribly barbaric.
    Do you really believe these are the harsher methods Bush wants to implement? In order for torture to work it has to involve extreme suffering.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •