Posted on 11/29/2011 9:29:32 PM PST by Kartographer
James Madison, father of the Constitution, warned, "The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become instruments of tyranny at home."
Abraham Lincoln had similar thoughts, saying "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter, and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
During war there has always been a struggle to preserve Constitutional liberties. During the Civil War the right of habeas corpus was suspended. Newspapers were closed down. Fortunately, these rights were restored after the war.
The discussion now to suspend certain rights to due process is especially worrisome given that we are engaged in a war that appears to have no end. Rights given up now cannot be expected to be returned. So, we do well to contemplate the diminishment of due process, knowing that the rights we lose now may never be restored.
My well-intentioned colleagues ignore these admonitions in defending provisions of the Defense bill pertaining to detaining suspected terrorists.
Their legislation would arm the military with the authority to detain indefinitely - without due process or trial - SUSPECTED al-Qaida sympathizers, including American citizens apprehended on American soil.
I want to repeat that. We are talking about people who are merely SUSPECTED of a crime. And we are talking about American citizens.
If these provisions pass, we could see American citizens being sent to Guantanamo Bay.
This should be alarming to everyone watching this proceeding today. Because it puts every single American citizen at risk.
There is one thing and one thing only protecting innocent Americans from being detained at will at the hands of a too-powerful state - our constitution, and the checks we put on government power. Should we err today and remove some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism, well, then the terrorists have won.
Detaining citizens without a court trial is not American. In fact, this alarming arbitrary power is reminiscent of Egypt's "permanent" Emergency Law authorizing preventive indefinite detention, a law that provoked ordinary Egyptians to tear their country apart last spring and risk their lives to fight.
Recently, Justice Scalia affirmed this idea in his dissent in the Hamdi case, saying:
"Where the Government accuses a citizen of waging war against it, our constitutional tradition has been to prosecute him in federal court for treason or some other crime."
He concluded: "The very core of liberty secured by our Anglo-Saxon system of separated powers has been freedom from indefinite imprisonment at the will of the Executive
Justice Scalia was, as he often does, following the wisdom of our founding fathers.
As Franklin wisely warned against, we should not attempt to trade liberty for security, if we do we may end up with neither. And really, what security does this indefinite detention of Americans give us?
The first and flawed premise, both here and in the badly misname patriot act, is that our pre-911 police powers were insufficient to combat international terrorism.
This is simply not borne out by the facts.
Congress long ago made it a crime to provide, or to conspire to provide, material assistance to al-Qaida or other listed foreign terrorist organizations. Material assistance includes virtually anything of value - including legal or political advice, education, books, newspapers, lodging or otherwise. The Supreme Court sustained the constitutionality of the sweeping prohibition.
And this is not simply about catching terrorists after the fact, as others may insinuate. The material assistance law is in fact forward-looking and preventive, not backward-looking and reactive.
Al-Qaida adherents may be detained, prosecuted and convicted for conspiring to violate the material assistance prohibition before any injury to an American. Jose Padilla, for instance, was convicted and sentenced to 17 years in prison for conspiring to provide material assistance to al-Qaida. The criminal law does not require dead bodies on the sidewalk before it strikes at international terrorism.
Indeed, conspiracy law and prosecutions in civilian courts have been routinely invoked after 9/11, to thwart embryonic international terrorism.
Michael Chertoff, then head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division and later Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, testified shortly after 9/11 to the Senate Judiciary Committee. He underscored that, "the history of this government in prosecuting terrorists in domestic courts has been one of unmitigated success and one in which the judges have done a superb job of managing the courtroom and not compromising our concerns about security and our concerns about classified information."
Moreover, there is no evidence that criminal justice procedures have frustrated intelligence collection about international terrorism. Suspected terrorists have repeatedly waived both the right to an attorney and the right to silence. Additionally, Miranda warnings are not required at all when the purpose of interrogation is public safety.
The authors of this bill errantly maintain that the bill would not enlarge the universe of detainees eligible for indefinite detention in military custody. This is simply not the case.
The current Authorization for Use of Military Force confines the universe to persons implicated in the 9/11 attacks or who harbored those who were.
The detainee provision would expand the universe to include any person said to be "part of" or "substantially" supportive of al-Qaida or Taliban.
These terms are dangerously vague. More than a decade after 9/11, the military has been unable to define the earmarks of membership in or affiliation to either organization.
Some say that to prevent another 9/11 attack we must fight terrorism with a war mentality and not treat potential attackers as criminals. For combatants captured on the battlefield, I tend to agree.
But 9/11 didn't succeed because we granted the terrorists due process. 9/11 attacks did not succeed because al-Qaida was so formidable, but because of human error. The Defense Department withheld intelligence from the FBI. No warrants were denied. The warrants weren't requested. The FBI failed to act on repeated pleas from its field agents, agents who were in possession of laptop with information that might have prevented 9/11.
These are not failures of laws. They are not failures of procedures. They are failures of imperfect men and women in bloated bureaucracies. No amount of liberty sacrificed on the altar of the state will ever change that.
A full accounting of our human failures by 9/11 Commission would have proven that enhanced cooperation between law enforcement and the intelligence community, not military action or vandalizing liberty at home, is the key to thwarting international terrorism.
We should not have to sacrifice our Liberty to be safe. We cannot allow the rules to change to fit the whims of those in power. The rules, the binding chains of our constitution were written so that it didn't MATTER who was in power. In fact, they were written to protect us and our rights, from those who hold power without good intentions. We are not governed by saints or angels. Our constitution allows for that. This bill does not.
Finally, the detainee provisions of the defense authorization bill do another grave harm to freedom: they imply perpetual war for the first time in the history of the United States.
No benchmarks are established that would ever terminate the conflict with al-Qaida, Taliban, or other foreign terrorist organizations. In fact, this bill explicitly states that no part of this bill is to imply any restriction on the authorization to use force. No congressional review is allowed or imagined. No victory is defined. No peace is possible if victory is made impossible by definition.
To disavow the idea that the exclusive congressional power to declare war somehow allows the President to continue war forever at whim, I will also be offering an amendment this week to de-authorize the Iraq War.
Use of military force must begin in congress with its authorization. And it should end in congress with its termination. Congress should not be ignored or an afterthought in these matters, and must reclaim its constitutional duties.
The detainee provisions ask us to give up consist rights as an emergency or exigency but make no room for expiration. Perhaps the Emergency Law in Egypt began with good intentions in 1958 but somehow it came to be hated, to be despised with such vigor that protesters chose to burn themselves alive rather allow continuation of indefinite detention.
Today, someone must stand up for the rights of the American people to be free. We must stand up to tyranny disguised as security. I urge my colleagues to reject the language on detainees in this bill, and to support amendments to strip these provisions from the defense bill.
http://paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=390
Well, that cuts it - we can't nominate Mitt Romney for POTUS, then.He's a Mormon, and Mormons are, as I understand it, instructed to always keep a year's supply of food in reserve . . .
Do it like me. I have for cows on the hoof! 17 chickens, and plenty of garden space!
The bill that they are talking about excludes American citizens; it has its own section which specifically states this in plain English.
Also, how do you get the “7 days of food makes you a terrorist” thing?
Did you read the post? Rand Paul himself says: “Detaining citizens without a court trial is not American. In fact, this alarming arbitrary power is reminiscent of Egypt’s “permanent” Emergency Law authorizing preventive indefinite detention, a law that provoked ordinary Egyptians to tear their country apart last spring and risk their lives to fight.”
I do believe the Senator from Kentucky does know what he is talking about.
Be very careful who you let know you’re prepping. Only my prepper kids and us discuss our plans.
And be careful who you let know you have emergency rations - unless you're prepared to ‘’share’ with them when they descend upon you.
Have supplies where they won't be easily found by the block wardens and SWAT-ers when they randomly raid, looking for ‘looters’ - which is now their legal label for anyone with more than 7 days of food on hand.
Good gravy, I only shop every two weeks - I'm a looter.
I grew up on a farm in the 30-40’s - we always had a YEARS worth of food on hand...in the gardens, the cellars. the barn, the hen house, etc.
Better have a safe place for storage....
I’ve seen the written law - it’s all there - Can’t remember the title - but someone here might.
but believe me, you have more than a weeks worth of food - you are NOT a storer - you ARE a looter...subject to arrest.
Considering that when I go out to work a well I take a minimum of 30 days’ food, especially in winter, I think the people who cooked up this bloody crock are full of the eventual byproduct of all that food.
Wasn't it the Government who ordered over 250,000,000 freeze dried meals? So many that ordinary distribution of Mountain House products to the 'regular folks' were disrupted?
So, who's the terrorists?
Hate to break it to ya - but if they declare and emergency or Martial Law - it's already provided for.
I have met quite a few people who are missing one or more fingers in my career in the oil patch. Some lost them to a spinning chain, others to the wide variety of heavy objects we work with daily out there.
Farm equipment is another common finger eater.
It isn't the only profession where lost digits are an occupational hazard, although the safety record has improved over the last three decades.
No explosives necessary.
No, not one gun. (Parse it like Clinton, and it's the truth.)
Worth repeating. The bit of goodwill, especially from those with little kids could be valuable in the future.
The downside is that it won't be long before marauders are sending out scouts in just that fashion to see who has 'extra'.
another good reason NOT to use credit or those store cards.....
Sorry pal, but we aren't mind readers. Now go have your sh*tf*t and calm down, willya?
And you can stuff your DU where the sun doesn't shine, nOOb.
I think we are on the same side. What do you think?
First, no "multiple posts", and a reply only to me.
Second, no mention of the Middle East.
Third, "alternate explosives" might be a kid dinking with a homemade firecracker when I grew up.
Fourth, the thread is about defining Americans as "domestic terrorists", something this stinking administration has been trying to do from day one, now just for having groceries in the cupboards.
Fifth, there are lots of ways to become digitless, and I just named a couple which affect people near and dear to me, because I work in the oil industry (maybe that's a two-fer for being a "terrorist" with this administration).
Top that off with some raving about "DU emoting" and I have had enough.
That's what I think.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.