Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Darn Geneva Convention is Too Confusing
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed 'hors de combat' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.
The reason Bush wants this changed?
Its also alot easier to convict people of terrorism if you don't have to actually produce evidence or if you accept hearsay, or better yet, if the suspect doesn't have access to the information his case is based upon:
NY Times: (T)rials at Guantánamo Bay in military tribunals...would allow evidence obtained by coercive interrogation and hearsay and deny suspects and their lawyers the right to see classified evidence used against them.Now I see why President Bush thinks the Geneva Conventions need clarification: They bring humanity to the brutality of war.
Molten Carbon
Friday, September 15, 2006
America Comes First
This isn't about party affiliation anymore, though they want you to believe it is. It isn't about the 'War on Terror' though that's how they scare us into giving away the liberties we are supposedly fighting for.
When the President acts contrary to established law, he is breaking the law no matter how much justification there seems to be. When Congress writes a law saying that his actions are now legal, it doesn't change the fact that he broke the law.
When our President wants to gut the Geneva Conventions in the name of 'clarification', you know he cares little for the welfare of our soldiers who fight relentlessly to protect our country.
When the President can casually count off 30,000 Iraqi civilians killed to achieve his objectives in the 'War on Terror' and then stare us down and claim
You can stare him right back in the eyes and say there is no difference. Does it matter the reason or moral authority on which those innocent women and children are killed? Does one reason make it right and the other reason make it wrong when the outcome is the same?
Its unacceptable to think theres any kind of comparison between the behavior of the United States of America and the action of Islamic extremists who kill innocent women and children to achieve an objective.
When the President and Congress sit idly by as the rest of the world struggles to find solutions to Global Warming, you know their pockets are lined by Big Business and their souls have been bought. The ice caps are melting faster than ever before, the summers are hotter than they have ever been and our elected officials hem and haw to protect the economy, an economy that won't be able to withstand the onslaught of more hurricanes like Katrina, inundated coast lines and new and ever virulent diseases.
What are we going to do? Are we going to be complacent and lazy? Are we waiting for the call to action? Have we become so confused and tired of the political rhetoric that we don't know which way to move or even how to proceed if we did know the way? Its time for new leadership. Its time to put our families and our country first.
We need leadership, we need a road map, we need moral direction. Most of all, we need to act as a united front. We shop at the same stores, we put our kids through the same schools, we drive on the same roads and watch the same TV shows. Its time to play to our strengths and ignore our differences. Our country depends on us depending on each other.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Domestic Espionage=Check Please
The FISA court has no precedent to form an arguable case for or against the legality of this program; They approve or deny wiretapping requests, they don't argue constitutional law. You may ask, what about the Supreme Court? This law and it's effects will be exempt from oversight by the Supreme Court as the FISA court will be the sole judiciary body responsible for oversight of
..any case before any court challenging the legality of classified communications intelligence activity relating to a foreign threat ... or in which the legality of any such activity or program is in issue.
Why the hoopla?
Not only is President Bush breaking established law by wiretapping American citizens, he is doing so under a flawed and unconstitutional premise of power. The NSA program in question violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and more importantly the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. The President claims however that he has inherent and Congressionally mandated authority to bypass the FISA court (break the law) as a result of the theory of the 'Unitary Executive', a divergent view of the Executive Branch which vests all powers not delegated by Congress or the Constitution to the President, in direct violation of the 'All Powers' clause of the Constitution, which delegates these powers to the people, NOT the President.
By allowing the President to maintain a shroud of secrecy over this program, Senator Specter is giving in to the President's claim that the constitutional authority inherent in the Office of the President is enough to ignore, circumvent and deride Congressionally enacted law and our system of checks and balances.
Should this bill pass, Senator Specter and the rest of Congress will have given the President the authority to spy on the international phone calls and emails of American citizens without a warrant. This is a dangerous precedent that will come back to haunt us when President Bush next pushes for warrantless eavesdropping on domestic communications. The argument now is that if al-Qaeda is calling into the U.S., Bush wants to know who they are calling. The argument soon will be that if al-Qaeda is calling from within the U.S., Bush wants to know about it. We will see an increased focus on domestic terror cells in the coming months, with a push to erase all checks on the President's authority related to eavesdropping.
A quote from Senator Specter's bill:
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the constitutional authority of the President to collect intelligence with respect to foreign powers and agents of foreign powers.Without a definition of 'foreign powers and agents of foreign powers' Senator Specter is creating an obvious loophole for future and increased domestic espionage by the Bush administration.
With a complicit Congress, President Bush is poised to realize the greatest coup of all time: the creation of a fascist America.
President Bush, 12/18/2000: If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
Domestic Espionage=Check Please
Technorati Profile
Thursday, September 07, 2006
CIA Secret Prison Announcement: Dirty Politics
The real reason for the sudden announcement? Dirty politics. By moving the people directly responsible for 9/11 to Guantanamo, President Bush is challenging Congress to now defy his requests for legislation authorizing him to prosecute using military tribunals. The Supreme Court already shot him down, and now he needs Congress to make it legal.
The scenario should play out this way: the Republican Bloc will create rubber-stamp legislation giving the President too much authority. The Dems won't go along with it and the Republicans will start in with their 'Democrats are soft on terror' tirade just in time for the November elections. He isn't being either honest or strong on terror, he is once again politicizing 9/11 and putting America last.
CIA Secret Prison Announcement: Dirty Politics