In one of the greatest attacks on civil liberties in this country’s history, Democratic and Republican Senators voted yesterday to approve a measure as part of the $662 billion defense bill that would allow for the military to hold both citizens and non-citizens indefinitely without trial — even those arrested on U.S. soil. In a welcomed change, President Obama has committed his Administration to fighting the measure as inimical to the rule of law. The measure was pushed by Carl Levin (D – Michigan) and John McCain (R – Arizona). While some members of Congress like Ron Paul (R., Texas) have denounced the bill, the measure passed at the same time that Administration lawyers publicly declared that the military and intelligence agencies alone should decide whether a citizen should be killed without a charge or hearing (including killing citizens on U.S. soil) — a position supported by President Obama who has ordered the killing of U.S. citizens under his claim of inherent authority.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, tried to pass an amendment that would have limited it to suspects captured “abroad” — a measure that still raised constitutional and international law problems. However, even that modest amendment failed on a vote of 45 to 55. Here is the voting roster, which includes Democrats Begich (D-AK), Casey (D-PA), Levin (D-MI), Inouye (D-HI), Landrieu (D-LA), Manchin (D-WV), McCaskill (D-MO), Pryor (D-AR), as well as independent Lieberman (ID-CT). A watered down amendment was then passed 99-1 that left the matter (it would appear) to the Administration. The provision merely states that nothing in the provisions could be construed to alter Americans’ legal rights. Since the Senate clearly views citizens are not just subject to indefinite detention but even execution without a trial, the change offers nothing but rhetoric to hide the harsh reality.
Virtually all Democrats and Republicans voted to strip citizens of their rights in a vote of 93-7.
What is fascinating is the Senators insisted on passing the provision despite the fact that the Directors of the FBI and CIA, the secretary of defense, and the director of national intelligence have all opposed it on national security and legal grounds. Nevertheless, people like McCaskill who are running for reelection want to prove that they are tough on terrorism by stripping citizens to the right to basic due process rights. The fact that the Democratic and Republican Senators took this step without even holding a hearing is a testament to the state of civil liberties in the United States.
It is unclear whether the President will have the integrity and courage to carry through on this pledge to veto this pernicious bill. For civil libertarians, we have reached our Alamo moment where the most basic principles of the rule of law are at stake. The Congress has long been indifferent if not hostile to civil liberties, but as discussed in an earlier column (and here), civil liberties has reached one of the lowest ebbs in both politics and policy in this country’s history. Such measures are now met with a gigantic and collective shrug from an indifferent populace.
The national debate has become positively otherworldly for civil libertarians. As the Senate set about rolling back civil liberties, Administration lawyers — CIA counsel Stephen Preston and Pentagon counsel Jeh Johnson — publicly explained to an audience this week that the decision whether to kill a U.S. citizens anywhere and anytime must be left solely to the discretion of the military and intelligence branches. President Obama has supported this view and claims the right to kill any citizen on his unilateral and unchecked executive authority. I discussed this horrific policy in a prior column (and here).
How did we come to this place? Well, it took the joint efforts of both parties and a country that has been lured into a dangerous passivity by years of war rhetoric. We now appear to define ourselves by our lifestyle rather than our rights. Being American appears to be treated as conclusory and self-evident — untethered to our defining principles. So in comes to this. The loss of the most basic right of citizens met not by applause but, even worse, a collective yawn.
Here is the Senate bill: BILLS-112s1867pcs
Source: Newser
Mike,
There are no new stories, only new ways to tell them, and the Bard covered most of the bases. Another of his plays that has much relevance to today’s political situation is Corriolanus. I read an article today in the NYT about an upcoming modernized film production starring and directed by Ralph Fiennes. If you’re not of a mind to read the play, the film looks quite promising. http://movies.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/movies/ralph-fiennes-and-vanessa-redgrave-in-coriolanus-review.html?src=dayp
Very interesting, mespo.
In the words of Marcellus to Horatio, “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”
HenMan,
I agree we need some Smedley Butlers today. I also know you are aware that Prescott Bush was part of that plot. This Bush patriarch also was partner’s in a bank that sponsored Hitler’s rise along with the Dulles Bros. and this is the strain of belief I was referring to though the Bush Crime Family is only part of it. This story has weighed heavily on me all day and like OS I fear for my children and grandchildren.
Mike,
I share your angst.
Gene,
And Brutus is an honorable man.
Anon,
Offtimes gadflys keep discussions honest and so are valuable. Other times though they’re merely pretentious asses that overvalue their purported insight.
Here is the applicable text of the proposed legislation with some emphasis supplied by me. i think Kenergy599 raises an interesting issue:
SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.
(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(e) Requirement for Briefings of Congress- The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be `covered persons’ for purposes of subsection (b)(2).
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined–
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.
(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
(c) Implementation Procedures-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.
(2) ELEMENTS- The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:
(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.
(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.
(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a)(2) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation session which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing session.
(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.
(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a)(4) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.
(d) Effective Date- This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.
Section 1032 (b) 1 says it doesn’t apply to US citzens…where do you folks think it applies to us?
FUCKING WAKE UP !!!!
raff,
I fully intend to do so. 🙂
Have fun Blouise.
“So in comes to this. The loss of the most basic right of citizens met not by applause but, even worse, a collective yawn.”
**********************
The better the constitution of a State is, the more do public affairs encroach on private in the minds of the citizens. Private affairs are even of much less importance, because the aggregate of the common happiness furnishes a greater proportion of that of each individual, so that there is less for him to seek in particular cares. In a well-ordered city every man flies to the assemblies: under a bad government no one cares to stir a step to get to them, because no one is interested in what happens there, because it is foreseen that the general will will not prevail, and lastly because domestic cares are all-absorbing. Good laws lead to the making of better ones; bad ones bring about worse. As soon as any man says of the affairs of the State What does it matter to me? the State may be given up for lost.
~Jean Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract Or Principles of Political Right, Book III, Ch. XV (1762)
I thought I’d read Professor Turley’s somber sentiments before. Great minds …, you see.
raff,
He is but he still voted for the Defense Bill … I sent an email
Anyway … in 2006 Brown defeated two-term Republican incumbent Mike DeWine who was a popular politician and one of the good republicans, if you know what I mean. I liked DeWine. They were very similar except Brown was a liberal and DeWine a conservative.
Mike DeWine is now AG in Ohio but, and this gets into our political infighting … his cousin Kevin, is the GOP chairman and neither of the DeWine’s support Kasich and both support Romney. Thus Romney’s quick trip into Ohio where he undercut Kasich’s chances on Issue 2.
In other words, right now the GOP in Ohio is having its own problems internally so the Chamber steps in with their clumsy ad to hit at Brown who is a very good campaigner as his easy defeat of the popular DeWine in 2006 illustrated. The Chamber flubbed it first time out of the box … may they continue to do so.
Obama and Brown get along quite well. 2012 is going to be a fun year here.
Mike Spindell and Mike-
I want to commend you both for your excellent analysis of the current situation.
Mike S.- I know you are familiar with the plot to carry out a coup against FDR and install a fascist dictator in 1933 that was prevented by Marine Corps General Smedley Butler. Today’s corporate fascists have considerably more influence over Congress and considerably more funds to buy them off. I hope we still have modern Smedley Butlers to prevent an overthrow today, although an overthrow may not be necessary any more. The sheep may elect their own executioners.
Mike- You have accurately described the feeling of hopelessness I have been experiencing for nearly a year as I watched my state descend into lawlessness. A corrupt Governor and a majority of its lawmakers have passed laws which can only be described as direct attacks on women, minorities, students, seniors, the poor, the middle class, teachers, and union members. That pretty much leaves only the rich and the corporations unscathed- a clear indication of a bought and paid for government.
Fortunately, the Democratic Senators and Assemblymen fought back- the Senators leaving the State to deprive the Republicans of a quorum and temporarily stop their rush to serve the Koch brothers and ALEC. Thousands of outraged Wisconsinites and UW students from all over the country descended on Madison to let the Republicans know that there was opposition to their dirty tactics. Two of the recalled Republican Senators have been ousted and replaced by Democrats. 300,000 of the 500,000 signatures needed to recall Scott Walker have been gathered in a few weeks time.
The best sign of hope I see is the Occupy Wall Street movement. Every violent overreach by city Mayors and police is met by an increase in the number of demonstrators. I am heartened by the fact that the participants are mostly young people who have remained non-violent in the face of unjustified force and aggression by the police- police who have been militarized and armed to the teeth by the Federal Government. This militarization of urban police forces is clearly not for the purpose of fighting foreign terrorists, but for the purpose of controlling the American people and protecting corrupt governments at every level.
Blouise,
Sherrod Brown is one of the good guys in the Senate.
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/12/newtening-is-here-run-for-your-life-mitt.html Newt could be the white republican that Mike S referred to.
SwM,
Yep … the C Street Chamber boys have left their bathroom stalls to start their ad campaign.. I saw the ad the other night.
In the meantime, Brown is busy saving 300 jobs in Elyria from one of the Chamber’s biggest contributors … the Chinese government. The Chamber lads don’t talk about that for fear of angering their Asian masters.
Brown has been building a war chest to fight off the Chamber onslaught which was predicted to start shortly after the Nov. elections.
This is going to be a fun year! It’s going to be down in the mud dirty. Kinda like what football used to be before all the sissies took over with their rules to protect the “million dollar stars” from getting boo-boos.
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/ohio-dems-chamber-of-commerce-doctored-a-photo-of-sherrod-brown.php?ref=fpnewsfeed Here’s one for you, Blouise.
HenMan,
Why doesn’t that surprise me? Thanks.
HenMan,
Walker and Kasich are brothers in arms …
Here’s what Walker has managed to do for your kids in Wisconsin: “The DPI says more than 41 percent of children in the state are eligible for free and reduced price school meals this school year. That’s 8 percent more than three years ago.”
Blouise-
Scott Walker and the Republican controlled Assembly passed a law permitting the open and concealed carrying of guns in Wisconsin. Walker just announced that guns will not be permitted in the State Capitol building.
In other words, “You peasants may have to duck for cover, but not me!”
Andy,
That would be Senate Bill 59 and his name is Sen. Tim Schaffer out of teabagger land in central Ohio (Pickering, parts of Columbus, etc) … the compassionate Schaffer wants the applicant to pay for the drug test which could be as high as $35. Last time the republicans tried this the democrats responded with a bill proposal to test state lawmakers and statewide officeholders first. Schaffer, mealy mouthed coward that he is, said he’s reintroducing the bill this year “after hearing stories from constituents.” I guess his constituents down there have a real working knowledge of drugs … which suggests they should all be tested too.
He also introduced the NRA sponsored legislation that allows for holders of a concealed carry license to carry their weapons in bars and restaurants. All law enforcement was against the bill but you know teabaggers and guns … it passed.
raff-
The Madison Strangler’s case is in the hands of the Capitol Police and the Wisconsin Judicial Commission who will probably deliberate for two years and then write a 400 page report announcing that they have no jurisdiction in the case.
http://www.expressmilwaukee.com/article-15278-the-madison-strangler.html