Federal Court: Bush Can 'Indefinitely' Detain Civilians!

Federal Court: Bush Can 'Indefinitely' Detain Civilians!

rawstory.com

The court effectively ruled that President Bush has the same right to indefinitely detain a civilian on American soil as he does an enemy soldier on a battlefield.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 15-7-2008 by DimensionalDetective]

Bye-bye habeas corpus...As the ever-changing definition of an "enemy combatant" seems to broaden in the eyes of our gov, this is just another nail in the coffin of the constitution...INDEFINITE detention without trial.

Now I know there will be those that point out that this is in relation to a suspected terrorist, but that term is broadening outward to include DISSENT and people who are deemed "radical" as well as "homegrown terrorists"...

This is something to be concerned over IMO.

"This decision," countered Jonathan L. Hafetz, counsel for al-Marri, means the president can pick up any person in the country--citizen or legal resident--and lock them up for years without the most basic safeguard in the Constitution, the right to a criminal trial."

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 15-7-2008 by DimensionalDetective]

Everyone is in bed with everyone. It seems as though if Bush makes a policy, they all follow suit and throw full support behind it. Every blue moon, you will get a blow to the Administration, which is all smoke and mirrors anyway, to make it seem like they are actually doing something.

I'm getting a 404 on the link. Has the story moved, or was there a typo?

TheRedneck

That links not happening for me.

The thread title reminds me of a story from last fall where a representive of either Greenpeace or Amnesty International was detained at LAX for an extreme duration, without explaination or being allowed to see her attorney. When she complained and demanded a hearing or a phone call she was informed that the holding cell was not considered U.S. soil and therefore she had no rights.

Every fiber of my being recoils against these facists.

My God, DD, when it this crap going to end.

Can't believe that Bush & Co. is distributed so widely.

What's always nagging me in the back of my mind, when I hear the term "enemy combatant" I always wonder if they are targeting people like us.

Next 6 months should shed some light.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
I'm getting a 404 on the link. Has the story moved, or was there a typo?

TheRedneck

I'm getting the same thing.



Does this surprise any of you?

[edit on 15-7-2008 by Simon_Boudreaux]

Sometimes I wonder if our own government is instigating a population civil unrest to bring down the next chapter in their corporate ridden agenda, the home grown terrorism bill.

See this bill is in congress just waiting for the right time to find an excuse to be enacted.

As always, great post, DD! This is what our country is coming to--a politicized judiciary, a pathetic congress, and a bully president. But the American people still seem to think that they cannot be touched by these violations of our civil liberties. Personally, I believe that many average Americans have been touched in some way by this fascist machine, but we don't realize it or it's not reported on the MSM, so we pretend it doesn't exist. The courts are supposed to review legislation to help keep a check on the executive branch--not remove the damned doors so that they can track elephants through! Of course, the same can be said of congress, but we've seen how ineffective they can be.

There is a recent thread regarding the fact that there won't be an uprising in the US, but the OP has the reasoning all wrong. There probably won't be an uprising in the US because we are so busy looking for someone (i.e., the government) to protect us that we avoid thinking for ourselves. Unfortunately, this includes average Americans, as well as law enforcement.

While I hold out hope that eventually people will tire of the useless rhetoric from Washington (no matter who the candidate is) and take their government back, but I'm not holding my breath.

Wow. So, if you have a problem with the Bush regimes actions, and voice concern about it... essentially, you can be held for it... indefinitely.

That's insane. People keep trying to say they're still free... not with this kind of garbage they aren't.

Essentially it's no longer freedom... very shortly this could easily become "We won't bother you so long as you obey and agree with us."

To what end though?
You don't push for something like this unless you intend to use it.

... and I seriously hope Bush isn't thinking about enacting martial law to carry his term a little further.

I have said it before and I say it now again. You all need to stop saying "its coming , its coming, its almost here", sallow that uncomfortable lump in your throat and shed a tear if you need to and accept the fact that the martial law police state IS HERE .... TODAY.... America is a fascist nation. It's over. The dream is dead. We live in a nightmare.

I didn't think I'd see anything like this in my lifetime. I was never an owner of weaponry. I never even thought about demonstrating against a President ever.

Sometimes the shock of it all is almost more than I can take. I admire the rest of you who have been dealing with this reality long before I woke up. I am so frightened for my children I can't decide whether or not to try to flee somewhere or stay and fight -- but where can we go when this Elite intends to kill all of us all over the world.

And how would we fight? I don't have guns ... yet. All those people marched for Ron Paul on nothing on any station about it here where I live. We need someone to come up with some concrete steps we can take because there are not enough caves and deep terrain venues for all of us to simply hide.

farm4.static.flickr.com...

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


Concern? What gives you that idea? It is fascism. Unchecked power. Some people "trust" the president; I say, trust the president as far as you would trust Charles Manson.

Scary times, indeed.

reply to post by titorite


As a member of a remaining free nation, I object.
I believe there is always the chance of resurrecting other free nations again.

If we have to wait until they have turned completely fascist and crumbled, so be it. So long as we return them to their original state as a free nation.

Of course, we will have to watch them like hawks after we resurrect them... we can't exactly trust them not to return to their old empire like ways.

The US as we knew it, you are right, is dead. There's no feasible way to turn back from fascism without either a revolution, defeat, or a total collapse.
No-body has ever simply amended their way out of a fascist state. Bloodshed and hardships are the notorious landmarks of revolution.

At the moment, the people are still in the propaganda phase. Believing what the government wants them to, without demanding evidence.
The government acting without the publics consent is a clear indicator of intended dictatorship.

Whats the number one thing you are used to hearing recently from American citizens... like a tape recorder... let me hear it! "Isn't Mr. Bush doing such a great job."
Why is it that they all say it exactly the same way. And when you ask them one simple question "Why? Why do you think he's doing a good job."
Their response is always "Uh... I don't know. He just is."
If that's not evidence of a propaganda induced citizen, I don't know what is.
Another phrase is "I don't need to be free, I'm not a terrorist."
... I don't even need to comment on that one.

On top of that, the line "Land of the free" was one heck of an introduction to their anthem... because it does the work of a propaganda machine for them. They could come out in the open and flat out admit they are a dictatorship... and the people will respond with "At least it's a free dictatorship."
lol.

I really wonder if most of their citizens even remember what freedom actually is. Some of them seem to think it's the right to "Own Horses" and "Walk to the store". (Some of the quotes I've heard, don't blame me for their ridiculous nature.)

Meanwhile, anyone who actually DOES oppose the government either is added to the Terrorist watch list (Which restricts employment by 80% of employers.), is ridiculed publicly if they happen to be a publicly known person... or, the new one, arrested for suspected terrorism.


However, no country lasts very long like this. It's only a matter of time before we remind them of what FREE nations do. We pick other nations back up after they've battered themselves, and make sure they never do it again.

This is extremely dangerous to put one man so above the law the fact that this one guy can pick and choose to have some one held indefinitely reminds me of some of the reasons our forefathers rebelled against a tyrannical monarchy.

The phrase King George should have new meaning now.

Originally posted by LDragonFire

The phrase King George should have new meaning now.

Especially the old war song...

"King George commands and I obey, over the hills and far away."

Here's the New York Times article:

Court Backs Bush on Military Detentions

President Bush has the legal power to order the indefinite military detentions of civilians captured in the United States, the federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., ruled on Tuesday in a fractured 5-to-4 decision.

But a second, overlapping 5-to-4 majority of the court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, ruled that Ali al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar now in military custody in Charleston, S.C., must be given an additional opportunity to challenge his detention in federal court there. An earlier court proceeding, in which the government had presented only a sworn statement from a defense intelligence official, was inadequate, the second majority ruled.

The Court's opinion is available online at their website:

Cases of Public Interest

Here's the "four unsigned paragraphs at the beginning of the decision summarizing the result":

PER CURIAM:

Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his military detention as an enemy combatant. After the district court denied all relief, al-Marri noted this appeal. A divided panel of this court reversed the judgment of the district court and ordered that al-Marri’s military detention cease. See Al-Marri v. Wright, 487 F.3d 160 (4th Cir. 2007).

Subsequently, this court vacated that judgment and considered the case en banc. The parties present two principal issues for our consid eration: (1) assuming the Government’s allegations about al-Marri are true, whether Congress has empowered the President to detain al-Marri as an enemy combatant; and (2) assuming Congress has empowered the President to detain al-Marri as an enemy combatant provided the Government’s allegations against him are true, whether al-Marri has been afforded sufficient process to challenge his designation as an enemy combatant.*

Having considered the briefs and arguments of the parties, the en banc court now holds: (1) by a 5 to 4 vote (Chief Judge Williams and Judges Wilkinson, Niemeyer, Traxler, and Duncan voting in the affirmative; Judges Michael, Motz, King, and Gregory voting in the negative), that, if the Government’s allegations about al-Marri are true, Congress has empowered the President to detain him as an enemy combatant; and (2) by a 5 to 4 vote (Judges Michael, Motz, Traxler, King, and Gregory voting in the affirmative; Chief Judge Williams and Judges Wilkinson, Niemeyer, and Duncan voting in the negative), that, assuming Congress has empowered the President to detain al-Marri as an enemy combatant provided the Government’s allegations against him are true, al-Marri has not been afforded sufficient process to challenge his designation as an enemy combatant.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinions that follow.

*We deny the Government’s motion to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. The Government relied on section 7 of the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-366, 120 Stat. 2600, which amended the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA) of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-148, § 1005(e)(1), 119 Stat. 2680, 2741-42. After we heard en banc argument in this case, the Supreme Court declared section 7 of the MCA unconstitutional. See Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. ___, ___, slip op. at 64 (June 12, 2008). The Government now concedes that we have jurisdiction over al-Marri’s habeas petition.

211 pages of details and seven different opinion then follow. Reading it now; let's see what evidence they have on this guy....

The reason they call it the American dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it!

Very sad. The majority is still asleep, while they are comfortably living in their false dream world, their freedoms are being taken away.

reply to post by johnsky


You are free to object but not because the law protects you. You are free because you are a red pill person with a free mind. Still, you are living with a free mind in a fascist nation. Can we resurrect it? ..... Not with out outside help. The first time we relied on the French for that help. The second time we relied on the brittish and the south lost. We can not do it alone because we can not stand up to UAVs and satellite telemetry and radio frequency weapons. We can prolong, agitate, and delay but to WIN we need help.

Until another nation sees an organized movement no nation will even offer help because their is no one to offer help to even if they wanted too. In the meantime we the disorganized disenfranchised can only bide our time and hope to survive till their is such organization.

DD Im sorry but I am going to post section 802 of the PATRIOT ACT as often as it is pertainent and logical on ATS... This is the concrete base of your excellent thread and all civil un-liberty matters in the US ...

S+F

SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping';
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';
(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
`
(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism as defined in section 2331;'.