Author Topic: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration  (Read 913 times)

youandme

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10957
Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« on: July 21, 2008, 04:06:28 PM »
Not good. Terrorist that may be let go, will be able to come into the United States unless Bush acts to make it a law where they will not be allowed to enter.

Democrats on the Hill oppose this. 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congress should explicitly declare war against al Qaeda to make clear the United States can detain suspected members as long as the conflict lasts, U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey said on Monday.

Mukasey urged Congress to make the declaration in a package of legislative proposals to establish a legal process for terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo, in response to a Supreme Court ruling last month that detainees had a constitutional right to challenge their detention.

"Any legislation should acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us," Mukasey said in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute.

"Congress should reaffirm that for the duration of the conflict the United States may detain as enemy combatants those who have engaged in hostilities or purposefully supported al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated organizations," he said.

New legislation should also prohibit courts from ordering a detainee to be released within the United States. It should protect secrets in court hearings, ensure that soldiers are not taken from the battlefield to testify and prevent challenges from delaying detainee trials, he said.

Democrats in control of Congress and civil rights groups reacted coolly, saying Mukasey's proposals would avert legal oversight and stack the deck in favor of the administration.

"Essentially it means that if a president declares someone to be a terrorist, they would then have the authority to hold that person without trial forever," said Chris Anders, senior legislative counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Bush has said the antiterrorism effort would be open-ended.

Mukasey spoke as the first U.S. war crimes trial began at the U.S. Naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where prisoners are held in a detention center condemned internationally for harsh treatment. The Supreme Court's decision on detainee rights did not invalidate trials for those already charged.

The attorney general said the administration already has the authority to detain suspected terrorists. But he said, "It would do all of us good to have the principle reaffirmed, not that that principle itself is in doubt."

A week after the September 11, 2001 attacks, Congress authorized "all necessary and appropriate force" against nations and groups that planned or supported the attacks. It did not specifically mention al Qaeda, which carried out the attacks, or their Taliban allies.

Some critics have said the Bush administration was too broad in asserting a nameless "war on terrorism."

The Supreme Court has upheld the government's right to hold al Qaeda detainees. But a U.S. appeals court last month rejected the government's argument that an ethnic Uighur Chinese Muslim could be held under the September 2001 authority as someone affiliated with al Qaeda.

The man, Huzaifa Parhat, had been seized in Pakistan after crossing from Afghanistan in December of that year with 17 other unarmed Uighurs.

DETAINEE CHALLENGES

Mukasey's proposals would also limit the courts' role in

determining a suspect's ties to terrorism, said Vincent Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

He said the proposals would sidestep earlier court rulings and predicted more administration legal defeats. "This will be the third time, after a very clear Supreme Court ruling on what the law is, that Congress has been called upon to ... stack the deck in favor of the administration," Warren said.

But Mukasey said new rules were needed to establish an orderly process for challenges and end delays in trying those already charged. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the latest Supreme Court decision "actually raised a lot more questions than it answered."

The Democratic U.S. Senate leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said it would be hard to pass Mukasey's proposals before U.S. President George W. Bush leaves office next January. "The courts are well equipped to handle this situation and there is no danger that any detainee will be released in the meantime," Reid said.

The terrorism trial of Osama bin Laden's former driver, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, began at Guantanamo on Monday. He faces life in prison if convicted by a U.S. military jury.

The Guantanamo prison houses about 265 suspected al Qaeda and Taliban members, including accused September 11 plotters.

A federal judge last week said the Hamdan trial could proceed despite the Supreme Court ruling.

youandme

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10957
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2008, 04:14:04 PM »
Go ahead come on in  ;D

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2008, 05:24:25 PM »
I don't know. It might not be a bad idea to let them in. My money's on them disappearing into oblivion within the first week of their release, never to be heard from again.  :D

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2008, 10:35:41 AM »
This is really an interesting development.

Generally war can only be declared btn nations.  Here we have Mukasey changing that time honored tradition to extend the declaration of war against a tactic.

Fascinating.  So in theory, our war against terror will never end b/c terrorism can never be eliminated completely.

Makes me think of what started all this:  19 hijackers with box cutters. 

What changed after 9/11?  We've always had terrorists in the world.  Some of them attacked the US.  Now the US is prepared to officially fight a perpetual war for perpetual peace (Vidal).

I'm not partial to that.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2008, 10:50:59 AM »
Fine then stop the enemy combatants have Constitutional rights crap, they don't have a right to a lawyer, due process or any other right do a citizen of this country. They have rights under signed Conventions or none at all if they are terrorists.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2008, 10:56:24 AM »
Fine then stop the enemy combatants have Constitutional rights crap, they don't have a right to a lawyer, due process or any other right do a citizen of this country. They have rights under signed Conventions or none at all if they are terrorists.
Your position is fatally flawed.

We have the finest military in the world.  But it is not a perfect military.

Mistakes are made.

Due process addresses those mistakes.

The 'Constitutional rights crap' to which you refer is the very thing that makes the US better than China or Russia or Iran.

If you want the US to become a totalitarian sham like those countries all in the name of battling terrorism, then I cannot help you out.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2008, 11:03:12 AM »
Decker...enemy combatants DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS UNDER THE US CONSTITUTION. The battlefield is nota crime scene. They might have rights under the Geneva convention. Period end of story.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2008, 11:08:07 AM »
Decker...enemy combatants DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS UNDER THE US CONSTITUTION. The battlefield is nota crime scene. They might have rights under the Geneva convention. Period end of story.
I know that but Habeas Corpus is the very backbone of our country.  It brought law to the Western Frontier...the court room over the lynch mob.

Either we adhere to our priniples or we become just like the evil empire.


Locking them up with no review or kangaroo court justice is not American.

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2008, 11:25:25 AM »
I know that but Habeas Corpus is the very backbone of our country.  It brought law to the Western Frontier...the court room over the lynch mob.

Either we adhere to our priniples or we become just like the evil empire.


Locking them up with no review or kangaroo court justice is not American.

Habeas Corpus is one of the greatest things granted to American CITIZENS. Why the fuck should some raghead fuck from Iraq who would love nothing more to cut my head be granted the same privileges that I am? It makes zero sense whatsoever.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2008, 02:47:06 PM »
OK atleast Decker is not arguing that they have some right to it, more that we should give them that right. To which I say oh hell no...
IF they are enemy troops, they get the convention, if they're terrorist shitbags, they get intterrogated and they I could care less what happens to them.
L