USA - H.R.6166 the devil's plaything.

Discussion in 'Drug Policy Reform & Narco Politics' started by allyourbase, Oct 5, 2006.

  1. allyourbase

    allyourbase Palladium Member

    Reputation Points:
    641
    Messages:
    1,587
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    from U.S.A.
    voting history:
    http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/house/2/votes/491/

    formal text of bill:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:2:./temp/~c109BlN2uU::

    what this means to american citizens:
    the constitution is now moot. you do not have the right to speak out against the government or the president if you do you can be tried by military tribunal as a terrorist with the president deciding the punishment. if you deny quarter to any member of the government (ie not allow them in your house without a warrant) you will be detained for as long as necessary and again put forward for military tribunal. you do not have the right to speak against the american military again with the same outcome. my writing this is now illegal under my own countries laws, simply because I disagree with president shrub. I can now, for posting this be arrested and tried by military tribunal. its time we cut out this infection in our government. I am now one of the "TERRORISTS" for thinking as I do. soon every liberal thinking american will be at guantanamo bay awaiting the executioners bullet. oh yes, and read the lovely part about attaining information from "suspects". thats right boys and girls torture is now legal. cannot seem to stop the hyperlink to these sites, hopefully a mod will fix that.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2006
  2. Forthesevenlakes

    Forthesevenlakes Platinum Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,408
    Messages:
    1,974
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    has this bill been passed?
     
  3. Paracelsus

    Paracelsus Platinum Member & Advisor

    Reputation Points:
    2,845
    Messages:
    2,371
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    from U.S.A.
    as far as i have seen there are two bills; dont know exactly why.one is marked as passed, one not.

    FUCK. Now everything makes sense to me. WTC 1993. Oklahoma 1995. WTC 9/11/2001. All of these terrorist attacks have served the government by enlarging its power over US citizens. After any of these attacks, Congress signed unconstitutional anti-terrorism laws. And that is what we have now. The US is a police state. No more "land of the free" and shit. It began with a bunch of pilgrims who were seeking religious FREEDOM and now this. Damn.

    .
     
  4. allyourbase

    allyourbase Palladium Member

    Reputation Points:
    641
    Messages:
    1,587
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    from U.S.A.
    yes it has passed
    hence the voting history
     
  5. Forthesevenlakes

    Forthesevenlakes Platinum Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,408
    Messages:
    1,974
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    hahah touche', allyourbase. Didn't think about that. This is truly scary stuff, I hope there are some countries where civil liberties are safe, so I can relocate there once the Bush Regime starts making the untermensch wear yellow stars on their clothing...
     
  6. Nagognog2

    Nagognog2 Iridium Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,936
    Messages:
    6,791
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Text of Bill regarding whom it effects:

    Sec. 948c. Persons subject to military commissions

    `Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by military commission under this chapter.

    `Sec. 948d. Jurisdiction of military commissions

    `(a) Jurisdiction- A military commission under this chapter shall have jurisdiction to try any offense made punishable by this chapter or the law of war when committed by an alien unlawful enemy combatant before, on, or after September 11, 2001.

    `(b) Lawful Enemy Combatants- Military commissions under this chapter shall not have jurisdiction over lawful enemy combatants. Lawful enemy combatants who violate the law of war are subject to chapter 47 of this title. Courts-martial established under that chapter shall have jurisdiction to try a lawful enemy combatant for any offense made punishable under this chapter.

    `(c) Determination of Unlawful Enemy Combatant Status Dispositive- A finding, whether before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense that a person is an unlawful enemy combatant is dispositive for purposes of jurisdiction for trial by military commission under this chapter.

    `(d) Punishments- A military commission under this chapter may, under such limitations as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe, adjudge any punishment not forbidden by this chapter, including the penalty of death when authorized under this chapter or the law of war.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------

    This infers it cannot be applied to citizens of the United States. Further:

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:1:./temp/~c109tnvFHg::


    Now maybe you all understand why my signature reads...
     
  7. Bajeda

    Bajeda Super Moderator Platinum Member & Advisor

    Reputation Points:
    4,741
    Messages:
    4,304
    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    from U.S.A.
    Heres a nice little summary of what the law does in terms of terrorist related matters (not that it has to be related to terrorism anyways, they just need an excuse).


    This bill essentially will:


    |-> revoke habeas corpus
    |-> create a secret committee appointed by Bush and Rumsfeld that has the power to declare any person - even a US citizen - to be an enemy, instantly depriving them of their legal rights. There will be no appeal allowed.
    |-> allow police to search through your home without a search warrant
    |-> end protection of prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions
    |-> give George W. Bush amnesty for any war crimes he has committed
    |-> allow for people to be put on trial in front of a kangaroo court military tribunal, even if they aren’t in any military, and have not engaged in military attacks against the USA
    |-> allow the government to convict people of crimes on the basis of secret evidence that the accused never sees
    |-> make it legal for the government to use testimony extracted through torture
    |-> end the legal right to be protected from forced self-incrimination
    |-> allow the government to imprison people without telling them what crimes they are being charged with
    |-> remove the right to cross-examine witnesses
    |-> allow for the records of trials to be kept secret from the American public
    |-> enable trials to begin even before a thorough investigation of the alleged crime has taken place
    |-> take away the right to a speedy trial, allowing people to fester behind bars without being charged of any crime
     
  8. allyourbase

    allyourbase Palladium Member

    Reputation Points:
    641
    Messages:
    1,587
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    from U.S.A.
    sadly they made two sections basicly detailing the same thing, one for americans and one for foreign elements, with both being listed as "enemy combatants" after resultive infraction. this isnt the do-all and end all Im simply trying to point out the path were on as a nation, and to illustrate how frightening it is to those of us who are very openly liberal.I support our folks in the military, but unlike these warjoy blinded conservatives I see that were hiring private contractors with exhorbenant fees to do jobs in our military that the military trains its own people to do. halliburton for example supplies or rather is supposed to supply fresh drinking water (ex halliburton employee reported that 63 of 65 water purification plants were NOT putting in the appropriate chlorine AT ALL, not just insufficient levels), hired to supply truck drivers for convoys (which as anyone with a family who has a military background will tell you is the job of a warrant officer), and hired to make their food (which the military of course trains its own to do, and has 24 hour chow lines on any base, and yet halliburtons in iraq is only open during four hours of the day for four possible meals which the soldiers have to line up for in such a manner it makes it conspiquous, if you have a friend in iraq, ask him how many of his buddies died during surprise attacks on the chowline, youll be surprised as grandma when she sat on the frozen pickle, I certainly was). and then out comes this resoltion, by our own senate and house of congress no less, which prohibits even the rational discussion of this handling should you have in their eyes a "negative viewpoint". and what are the specialist military personel who are in iraq and supposed to be doing these jobs doing? playing playstation according to my friend wes whos done two tours in iraq for the marines. whats more other "contractors" hired out by the military from the firm CACI have been used as INTERROGATORS in the prisons there, if you disbelieve me check out the reports on abu ghraib, 3 out of 7 people in the photos worked for CACI of these none has been charged with ANYTHING whereas 3 ex military personel are now in prison for the action. whats more the CACI's were their SUPERVISORS. matters of national security are being handed over to corperate syndicates to mishandle. its a really sad situation. a sad way to handle a war. and every time an american dies in that country it pisses me off a little bit more, as it should every one of you.

    all this information Ive obtained from friends currently serving putting their lives on the line for no damned good reason.


    *end long winded diatribe* LMAO
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2006
  9. Forthesevenlakes

    Forthesevenlakes Platinum Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,408
    Messages:
    1,974
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    allyourbase, did you also know that the people hired to protect halliburton personnel are better armed than US combatants? and that they make more money and have armored vehicles unlike the average soldier? there's a strong feeling of resentment for these people from the enlisted troops, and rightly so, they're getting shortchanged. Tax dollars COULD go to funding these troops...now, I do think this is an unjust war, but if one is going to wage it, they could at least give the people who enlisted adequate supplies and equipment, instead of re-routing our tax dollars to make money for private corporations. it seems unfair to everyone involved...except of course, the good old boys club of politicians and big business.

    okay, back on topic...
     
  10. allyourbase

    allyourbase Palladium Member

    Reputation Points:
    641
    Messages:
    1,587
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    from U.S.A.
    yes I DID! blackwater is the firm, of the "private army" over there these mercenaries supposedly helping us fight this war. very scary right wing ultrachristian conservative company. my good friend died on get this GAURD DUTY for a member of blackwater who was supposed to be there on gaurd duty for a visiting american(dont have full info on this yet, I will get to his mom and ask though as Im sure she knows). and he died, shot in the chest, drown on his own blood because the marines didnt see fit to issue him a ballastic ceramic flak jacket. but for a few hundred dollars, and someone who wasnt supposed to be there to begin with, my friend would be alive. and all this because this person who worked for blackwater wanted to go wandering around the shops of tikrit and had petitioned for military escort.
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2006
  11. Nagognog2

    Nagognog2 Iridium Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,936
    Messages:
    6,791
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    During an ACLU-sponsored conference featuring John Dean - attorney for Nixon and White House aides during Watergate - and others, Mr. Dean compared Watergate with the governement today. He pointed out that Watergate never could get to trial today due to the secrecy invoked by Bush and cronies. It would be treason to expose these crimes that led to Nixon's downfall. He went on to point out that we are perhaps one more "terrorist attack" against the USA before full-scale fascism is brought down on the American people. No rights. No trials. Nothing but obey or die. And who would we be forced to obey? The rules made up by the corporations that are running the so-called government.
     
  12. allyourbase

    allyourbase Palladium Member

    Reputation Points:
    641
    Messages:
    1,587
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    from U.S.A.
    of course, they learned from nixon's mistake, its not the deed that gets you punished, its the evidence.
     
  13. allyourbase

    allyourbase Palladium Member

    Reputation Points:
    641
    Messages:
    1,587
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    from U.S.A.
  14. zera

    zera Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,741
    Messages:
    692
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    from Illinois, U.S.A.
    I despise the Bush administration and the Patriot Act and other fascist ridiculous legislation as much as anyone, but you guys are being fatalistic. The Supreme Court has become a push-over institution that cares little about the Constitution, but it will be a long time before they allow habeas corpus to be suspended.
     
  15. Nagognog2

    Nagognog2 Iridium Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,936
    Messages:
    6,791
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Does the word: Guantanamo - have meaning here, Zera? Here we don't have a writ of habeus corpus. We don't even have charges against the detained. That's what H.R. 6166 is all about - to make this the law of the land. No charges, you just vanish. No habeus corpus needs be filed as there are no charges, evidence, or trial needed. It's just "We say - You go."

    Presumed guilty until they either change their minds, or execute you.
     
  16. Voices

    Voices Titanium Member

    Reputation Points:
    113
    Messages:
    129
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Sounds surprisingly like Augusto Penochet, Chile, 1974 to (? they may still be trying to pin a crime on that tyrant).
     
  17. zera

    zera Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,741
    Messages:
    692
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    from Illinois, U.S.A.
    Oh don't get me wrong, I think this is absolutely horrendous. And the fact that no one's outraged about the complete suspension of the basic rights of the Magna Carta when our forefathers fought a revolution based on just a few taxes, just speaks to the absolute ignorance and apathy of the American public. If I had my way everyone associated with Guantanamo would be tried for war crimes.

    But there have been successful challenges to the indefinite detention of Guantanamo, even though Bush tried to claim that they had no right to even bring the challenge to court. The Supreme Court basically gave the administration a verbal bitch slapping in Rasul v. Bush. If the Court's not going to let Bush suspend habeas corpus for foreign nationals captured overseas they sure as hell aren't going to let it stand when it's done to US citizens. So unless they manage to make people dissapear with no evidence that the government took them (and hence a legal challenge could never be made on their behalf) this law would be struck down. I don't believe that even this tyrannical admistration has the balls to just plain and out kidnap people without telling anyone that they've been taken.

    Though what really terrifies me even more then them using this, it's them not using this and waiting for the right time to. I'd rather prefer that they try these powers out in the next 6 months, so the ACLU can challenge it and it gets struck down. But what I really see happening is the government not employing this until the judicial systems on their side (they could wait 20 years), then bringing a dead law up knowing they can get away with it now, when before they couldn't.

    (Warning: tangent) This is actually similar to how they got Michael Milken. They knew none of their RICO charges would stick, so the kicker was "stock parking" and Milken was the only person in the history of the United States to ever be charged with this. Had he challenged this at the appealate court level instead of plea bargaining he almost would have assuredly gotten off, as his colleagues who were charged with similar things all had their convictions overturned.
     
  18. Nagognog2

    Nagognog2 Iridium Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,936
    Messages:
    6,791
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Pinochet was installed in 1973 after the US-sponsored coup (September) that murdered Salvador Allende - and unknown thousands of other Chileans. Rather than oil, as we have now for a premise, the violent overthrow of the elected government of Chile was due to the Chilean decision to nationalize the copper industry. Among other industries - but copper was the biggie to companies in the USA such as Kennecott Copper. Heavy contributors to President Richard M. Nixon's campaigns.

    Then, as now, the US government denied any hidden agenda in the action. Such as wanting more money for the oil industry. Then they even denied any involvement. Now they invent "weapons of mass-destruction" and collusion with a terrorist group. Then they tried to defend due to collusion with a "terrorist government(s)" - Cuba and the U.S.S.R.

    Ironic the USA now takes it's "detainees" to Cuba to torture them, or to secret prisons (torture-chambers) inside the former "terrorist government's" (USSR) territory. I'll wager Henry Kissinger himself thought this one


    (EDIT due to simultaneous posts)

    Zera. It's a good argument you pose. I hope you go to law school. But you are missing a key point: Under the War Powers Act that Bush & Co. are heralding as their given right, they don't believe they need any approval from the courts to do whatever they please. They have demonstrated this and said this. Such as the Judge who struck down their legality in wiretapping everyone's phones etc. "National Security" is what they say, and they told the Judge they would ignore his ruling to defend America. Then Bush started to claim the al Qaida people, and the leaders of Venezuela and Peru were "Fascists" and they were at war with fascists like Hitler and Mussolini. It's a drumbeat to stifle any dissent in the USA while stating they can and will do what they, alone, believe to be in their interests.

    Your argument fails on the point that they can't legally do this. They have stated clearly that the laws do not apply anymore under War Powers. But I do admire your idealism. What I am saying is not a "fatalistic" outlook. It is the one thing that the Bush administration stated when they were first, using the word very loosely, elected - "Facts don't matter. It's all about faith!" I am stating the very "facts" the Bush Regime very much do not want to matter. In November we will see how much facts do, or don't, matter in the USA.

    Fair & Balanced! LOL.
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2006
  19. Alfa

    Alfa Productive Insomniac Staff Member Administrator

    Reputation Points:
    14,288
    Messages:
    38,277
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    117 y/o from The Netherlands
    Are you serious? Your country already was infamous for doing so before the Bush administration. This administration has taken it quite a few steps further. I don't know if there was anything about it on the news in the US, but your president has recently admitted the existance of concentration camps around the world, including in Europe. I know US media rather talks about detention camps, but that's quite an understatement.

    concentration camp
    n.
    1. A camp where civilians, enemy aliens, political prisoners, and sometimes prisoners of war are detained and confined, typically under harsh conditions.
    2. A place or situation characterized by extremely harsh conditions.

    The first causualty of war is always the truth.
     
  20. Paracelsus

    Paracelsus Platinum Member & Advisor

    Reputation Points:
    2,845
    Messages:
    2,371
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    from U.S.A.
    Yeah I remember that there was a Lebanese German citizen who was a terrorism suspect and was kidnapped by the CIA and deported to one of those secret "detention camps" in Afghanistan, tortured for two months, and then released, because he was innocent... He sued the US government but AFAIK it didn't help much.

    And i once read that there were some rumors in the media about a secret CIA prison in Romania, but investigations on this stopped soon as our president here is a puppet of the US.

    EDIT: News article in german, for those interested about the CIA kidnapping: http://www.wiesbadener-kurier.de/politik/objekt.php3?artikel_id=2556407
    .
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2006