chucK Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Your search didn't work, but I think I found the provision removing the ability to file a habeas corpus action. Here you go: "Provisions of Chapter Sole Basis for Review of Military Commission Procedures and Actions- Except as otherwise provided in this chapter and notwithstanding any other provision of law (including section 2241 of title 28 or any other habeas corpus provision), no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever, including any action pending on or filed after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military commission under this chapter, including challenges to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions under this chapter." From here I guess you can see why people had a tough time digging this up. It's pretty boggling legalese. However, I have a hard time believing that your doubt is genuine. There are countless stories in the news, especially the ones relating to the Specter Ammendment that talk about how a writ of Habeas Corpus will be denied to detainees (the Specter Ammendment was the one that specifically tried to remove the restrictions to Habeus). You think every newspaper online is playing loose with the facts, but Prez Bush is the only one not? In fact, has Prez Bush even said anything about Habeas? I'd be surpised if he did. Finally, here's a bit from Wikipedia on Habeas Corpus : "On 29 September, 2006, the U.S. Senate approved a bill which would suspend habeas corpus for anyone determined to be an "unlawful enemy combatant engaged in hostilities or having supported hostilities against the United States"[1], [1] by a vote of 65-34. (This was the result on the bill to approve the military trials for detainees; an amendment to remove the suspension of habeas corpus failed 48-51.)" full page here Do you not believe this either? What is so wrong with Habeas? In the US people are still locked up, but they are given a chance to contest their confinement. What is wrong with this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 Full legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:3:./temp/~c109cTUjRL:: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 try this web page Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 try this web page Not to be picky but this link does not include the final legislation, just the seperate House and Senate versions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClimbingPanther Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 CBS, go back to your chemistry where you can curse compounds for their properties instead of working with them adroitly. In doing so, your acumen there will appear as it does here. Watch yourself You mess with one molecule, you mess with the whole mole. Don't tear people down because if you're not going to be part of the solution, then you're part of the precipitate. Maybe you're just in a bad mood because you got a toothache in your molar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 I don't know whether anyone one has noticed, but this has gone from a piss fest to a pretty damn decent debate. Now isn't that a lot more fun? Come 'ere, ya'll. Group hug. underworld, back on up over here. Get those whitey tighties down and give uncle Tvash some sugar. I mean it, though. Frankly, this country needs a bit less PC and a lot more of this. Kudos to the moderators, or lack thereof, of this site. Jesus, if the Dems and Reps were this frank we'd all be better off. There's nothing wrong with evacuating your bowels on someone as long as it's done for the purpose of procreation. So carry on...I must sign off and repair, yet again, my treasonous ThermaRest. For those who want to keep abreast of pending actions on this issue (and/or participate in a letter writing), regardless of your views, you might consider joining that legislative action network at www.aclu-wa.com. Their letter writing timing is pretty damn good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Your search didn't work, but I think I found the provision removing the ability to file a habeas corpus action. Here you go: "Provisions of Chapter Sole Basis for Review of Military Commission Procedures and Actions- Except as otherwise provided in this chapter and notwithstanding any other provision of law (including section 2241 of title 28 or any other habeas corpus provision), no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever, including any action pending on or filed after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military commission under this chapter, including challenges to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions under this chapter." the added bold statement might make a difference in all of this. idunno. what is important is that things are all fqed up right now, (read: war) standards change and actions adjusted accordingly. on the one side you think that the powers that be in the u.s. are inherently bad and will mis-handle their powers on the other side, i think that the u.s. is inherently good and that certain powers they have will be used in our best interest. you can call be blind all you want or a sucker for believing that certain people are capable of good.... but remember, it's just a different perspective. no group hug tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 on the one side you think that the powers that be in the u.s. are inherently bad and will mis-handle their powers on the other side, i think that the u.s. is inherently good and that certain powers they have will be used in our best interest. you can call be blind all you want or a sucker for believing that certain people are capable of good.... but remember, it's just a different perspective. To state it more clearly then: restricting the rights of the accused is a "good" thing? The Bush Admin actions have had results by which we can judge the effectiveness of these policies. How about the Canadian citizen who was pulled out of line at JFK interogated, and then detained, without charges, in NYC for a month. Then shipped to Jordan, where he had left from years ago, and was beaten into signing a confession. After serving almost a year in a 6x6x8 cell, and after significant diplomatic pressure from Canada, he was released. He was guilty of nothing other than orginally being from the middle east. Held without charges, no chance to review the evidence against him, no way to challenge his detention, and then shipped off, in our rendition sort of way, to be tortured. The evidence is already in on how we treat innocents, including some who were swept up and into Gitmo. So this is what we want our democracy to represent? Not me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 on the other side, i think that the u.s. is inherently good and that certain powers they have will be used in our best interest. The US is "inherently" good because we have followed the rule of law, and the law works well (225+ years) in preventing the excesses of extreme power. The current govt. has been consistently working to remove safequards against governmental excesses. Signing on to a program that restricts your rights because "i dunno", is stupid. Head in the sand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 the current govt is different than other recent ones - that is...it is governing during a war. denying that is "head in the sand" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 (edited) the current govt is different than other recent ones - that is...it is governing during a war. denying that is "head in the sand" Yea "da war on terror" another slogan. A never ending "war". About as sucessful as the war on drugs. What a bunch of morons running the show. Their fate: Mark their names and mark them well. For them, no minstrel raptures swell. High though their titles, proud their name, boundless their wealth as wish can claim, these wretched figures shall go down to the vile dust from whence they sprung, unwept, unhonored and unsung. --Sir Walter Scott Edited October 5, 2006 by Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
counterfeitfake Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 so how's the protest going? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 Thanks for asking! Pretty good from what I'm hearing. But I will not be joining until it gets downtown. Rode in early to be able to leave a bit early and attend. See ya there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
counterfeitfake Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 no you won't, but have fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 Your apathetic, whatever. I'll give you the report tomorrow. And then you'll say I'm making it up. You can sit on your hands and do nothing. Or your could do something, (anything for Christ's sake)to make the world a better place. It's up to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 (anything for Christ's sake) now your sounding like a bible-thumping-right-wing nut job... keep religion out of this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 the current govt is different than other recent ones - that is...it is governing during a war. denying that is "head in the sand" OK, I'll stop by one more time to snap the elastic on underworld's bunched up BVDs: The US has 'been at war' almost continuously since WWII. For 35 of those years we lived under threat of nuclear extermination; a threat FAR more serious than terrorism. When I was in the navy the expected lifetime of a US warship at war with the Soviet Union was 5 minutes. In almost every wargaming scenario, strategic nuclear exchange happened within an hour. After 50 years we're still officially at war with N. Korea, a belligerent country with nuclear capability and an increasingly capable means of delivering them. We've fought more than 20 other regional conflicts. So cut it with the 'but we're at war!' excuse. This is America. We're always at war, bucko. The biggest difference between the cold war and the war on terror is that the war on terror is a significantly DECREASED threat to our national security, by comparison. Are we gonna be a bunch of pussies and run scared, or are we gonna have some balls and stand up for what we believe, regardless of who the asshole-of-the-day is? And if you're so concerned about prolonging your life at all costs, (Oh, Mr. President, protect me from those big bad terrorists!) what the hell are you doing on a climbing website? If the Bush admininstration really wanted to fight their 'War on Terrorism' effectively, they would not have squandered our military capability in a sideshow like Iraq, exposing us to more dire threats like, hey, Al Qaeda...and N. Korea, and Iran. Do you really think we represent any credible threat to those nations right now? Apparently they don't think so...that's why they're thumbing their noses at us. If this administration really wanted to bolster national security they'd spend more than a measely $1 million a year repatriating the many tons of bomb grade nuclear material we distributed during our 'Atoms for Peace' program to keep it out of the hands of terrorist. They'd be doing something real about port security. They would have found and charged more than 1 of the plotters of 911 (and that case is going poorly). They wouldn't have turned a blind eye to Pakistan's nuclear proliferation, which, coincidentially, is responsible for Iran's nuclear program. And, last but not least, they'd be working on a real plan for energy independence, rather than continuing to line their oil and coal buddies' pockets with more of the same old same old. Still a true believer? Christ, man, the Bush administration is either the most incompetent in history, the most corrupt in history, or both. You choose, but the hole they've dug for this country for decades to come is unmatched. They're policies have left us utterly unprepared for the emerging challenges of this century. Global warming. China. Iran. Nuclear proliferation. What do you think is going to happen when we have another Katrina scale disaster? Think we're ready? And you actually TRUST these guys? Need a Kleenex to get that sand out of your eyes? Do you really think people who are concerned about protecting our civil liberties, particularly from this untrustworthy government, are not aware that there is still a terrorist threat out there? Come on. You're parroting FOX again. We just refuse to run scared. And we don't want to see the very best thing about our country, other than Roger's Pilsner and 'Deadwood', destroyed by a bunch of short sighted miscreants who've completely fucked up every major program they've launched since they were sworn into office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinomyte Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 My list of things that you should do to make the world a better place: - If you see a Clif Bar wrapper on the trail, pick it up - Don't cut switchbacks - Yell "rock" when you dislodge one, even when no one's there - Camp at least 100 feet from lakes - For God's sake, dig a hole or pack it out!! Feel free to add to my list! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Phil Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 - Don't spray in the Newbies Forum - Turn your noses up at commuters whos vehicles use 5% more gas than yours. - Put advertising logos on your climbing helmet. - Mountie bashing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Your apathetic, whatever. my lack of protest is not a result of apathy. believe it or not, some people don't think like you. yes, people have their own thoughts. i guess this place isn't that kind of 'diverse' tho. how am i any more a parrot than you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 - masturbate yourself less - masturbate others more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 - masturbate yourself less - masturbate others more Check this out. link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 my lack of protest is not a result of apathy. Live Consume Be Silent Die Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinomyte Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 For 35 of those years we lived under threat of nuclear extermination; a threat FAR more serious than terrorism. A THREAT far more serious perhaps, but the fact is that terrorists have struck, and nukes have not. Do you really think we represent any credible threat to those nations right now? Apparently they don't think so...that's why they're thumbing their noses at us. Of course we pose a threat to them. The weak often puff themselves up to appear more threatening. Do you expect them to actually just cave and say "You're right, we'll do whatever you want"? Still a true believer? Christ, man, the Bush administration is either the most incompetent in history, the most corrupt in history, or both. You choose, but the hole they've dug for this country for decades to come is unmatched. They're policies have left us utterly unprepared for the emerging challenges of this century. Global warming. China. Iran. Nuclear proliferation. What do you think is going to happen when we have another Katrina scale disaster? Think we're ready? And you actually TRUST these guys? Need a Kleenex to get that sand out of your eyes? It appears that you are blaming the present administration for global warming, natural disasters, etc. You are probably blaming current policies for doing nothing to help global warming, and blaming them for inadequate response to natural disasters, but I'm not convinced. There are a lot of problems out there, and no administration can address them all. Blaming the current administration for the things it is ignoring is all about partisan politics. Fortunately for those who like to bitch, this will always be an option! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 5, 2006 Author Share Posted October 5, 2006 - masturbate yourself less - masturbate others more Check this out. link Hmmm. You found this link in 3 minutes. Hmmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.