HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Oct. 20, 2006 ”Love your country, but never trust its government.” Robert A. Heinlen The right-wing continues to hoot and holler over the passage of HR-6166, the Military Commissions Act, which “suspends” the write to a writ of habeas corpus for foreigners suspected of terrorism—at least, that’s who this law effects thus far. Those “aiding and abetting enemies of the United States” could be next. While I’m in agreement with the general idea behind the law, it is the ambiguous nature of the law that Americans should be wary of. First of all, the idea that this principle has merely been “suspended” for foreigners is an outright lie, being that the act has set no discernible time frame for the law to expire. While the law focuses on known enemies of the U.S. (those we are at war with), don’t think that this act won’t eventually be expanded and applied to “American terroists,” or “domestic enemies of the state.” Here’s a hint for you: Former Attorney General John Ashcroft believes countering the administration’s actions “helps terrorists.” His exacts words were, "Your tactics only aid terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve…They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to America's friends.” Here is a fellow who has turned exercising of one’s rights into melodrama and hyperbole. Do you really think he isn’t looking ahead to the slow, but steady dismantling of American liberties? This is a man who believes it is okay to use warrantless wiretaps on the phones of Americans who have yet to be accused of anything. These “enemies of the state,” are a matter of perspective. Criticism of an administration’s foreign policy might eventually constitute such a breach. Expansion of HR-6166 would be an effective means of corralling those in the media who expose government lies (read: New York Times, or any other “liberal” outlet). Whose to say that something as innocuous as an article on this site, couldn’t be construed as criticizing the government, or worse aiding and abetting a foreign power? If a writ of Habeas Corpus is no longer part of the judicial equation, what would stop the government from jailing American citizens indefinitely.” The definition of an enemy combatant is “a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or ‘‘(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.”2 You read between the lines. No doubt I’m putting the cart before the horse, but contemplate the words of Jacob G. Hornberger: “While it might be tempting to conclude that the writ of habeas corpus is some minor legal procedural device that the president and the Congress have now canceled, nothing could be further from the truth. The writ of habeas corpus is actually the lynchpin of a free society. Take away this great writ and all other rights – such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, gun ownership, due process, trial by jury, and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures and cruel and unusual punishments – become meaningless.”1 (For the record, Hornberger is the founder of the Future of Freedom Foundation). The writ of Habeas Corpus was intended to be an integral piece of American jurisprudence. The authors of the constitution wrote in Article I, Section 9, "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.” Hence, a Supreme Court battle looms over interpretation of how this law should be applied. Don’t be surprised if the law is upheld; and if we fail to speak out against its expansion, then you can kiss our long-held liberties good-bye. It means that we have been scared into a quiet acquiescence Benjamin Franklin said it best: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Sources: 1 Jacob G. Hornberger, “Habeas Corpus: The Lynchpin of Freedom,” Future of Freedom Foundation, 2006 2 Text of H.R. 6166, The Military Commission Act of 2006 ------------ About the author: Timothy N. Stelly, Sr. is a 46-year old poet, novelist and aspiring screenwriter who resides in northern California with his three youngest children--Lawrence, Kimberly and Dante. He is a member of various writer's groups and has three novels in print, his most recent, "Like A Straight-Up Sucka," is available at www.lulu.com. website: http://stellbreadO@tripod.com Email: stellbread@yahoo.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
