Posted on 01/08/2003 8:31:11 PM PST by kattracks
The powers are granted by the Constitution.
There are 286,000,000 American citizens and three of them were scumbags who betrayed their country. In George Washington's day, they would have been hung.
Hamdi is an enemy combatant, his citizenship is moot. He chose to be an enemy combatant. Screw him.
If a future President begins jailing his politcal foes because of their ideology then that becomes a political question and if it gets bad enough then you lock and load.
Well, don't I feel better [/sarcasm]
It doesn't matter how you feel. The Constitution is clear on the separation of powers and the CIC's powers during war time.
The courts have been clear since Ex-Parte Quirin on the status of enemy combatants be they "citizens" or not.
You can worry about Hillary Clinton until the cows come home. Hamdi is an enemy combatant and he's staying in the stockade until Bush says the war is over.
Personally, I think he should be vacationing in Gitmo with his fellow jihadists but hey, I can live with the stockade or the brig.
On NOW at RadioFR!
Join AnnaZ, Mercuria and Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson for a…
A DAY AT THE RACISTS!
The Lott Thing!
The Byrd Thing!
The Je$$e Jack$on Thing!
The Sharpton Thing!
The Profiling Thing!
The Reparations Thing!
The Thought Police Thing!
Can't argue with your statement.
But, can you tell me upon whom war has been declared...and when we know it is won? Can you define to whom these extraordinary war powers can be applied and for how long they can be enforced?
Here's my fear: ~ What's to prevent Hillary! (or whomever) from saying that war continues...and as such~ so does her "Constitutional right" to enforce her "wartime" powers to imprison without a glance toward the Bill of Rights?
I trust George W. Bush.
But shouldn't we pay attention to who else we may be handing such broad powers?
They know about Quiren.. They just don't want their readers to know it, too.
To have acknowledged Quiren would have negated this precious little distortion...
The case, which set up a stark clash between the nation's security interests and its citizens' civil liberties, may have expanded the power of the presidency...
Since when did the presence (or absence) of a law keep the Clintons from skirting the law or abusing their authority? They did what they wanted, whether the law was on their side or not.
To lawbreakers, laws are no obstacle. Only the lawful are constrained by the law.
The best way, the only way, to protect the country from such abuse is to elect political leaders of character -- people who can be trusted with the power of office.
Ergo, no more Clintons!
That's all this decision is all about.
Congressman Billybob
Promise?
So the solution is to put the law on their side? To set up the federal agencies to enforce their despotic rule? What sort of logic is that?
No more Clintons? Can you guarantee that? Our Constitution was wisely constructed based on the reality that there is no way to stop corrupt people from getting into office. Shredding the checks and balances established by that Constitution is nothing but blind acceptance that "Comrade Napoleon is always right".
You can number me among the confused regardless of the New York Times interpretation.
Has the United States Congress declared war and extended war powers to the Chief Executive?
How can the War on Terrorism be distinguished from the War on Drugs or the War on Poverty?
Is it the War on Terroism or the War on Drugs or the War on Poverty that forbids citizens from traveling with more than an arbitrary amount of cash(especially through airports);can be relieved of that cash without judicial review or due process;or even presumes guilt until innocence is established with an extensive strip search? (especially through airports)
Is the charge of "enemy combatant" established when a citizen is seized on a battlefield or when he/she is sitting in a domecile?
Will the charge of "enemy combatant" be applied equally to Earth First! Arsons; IRS Tax Dissidents; Militias;or political incorrect websites?
In short will I be an "enemy combatant" if I am traveling through Tennessee with my wife, child and dog and subject to a felony stop and the gratuitous execution of a family pet?
Any number of bows and ribbons will not change the fact the Bush Administration is little more than the third term of the Clintigula Administration.
"Read my lips: No New Tyranny" seems to be the motto of Bush43.
Best regards,
The War Against the Babary Pirates was declared in almost identical fashion to the War Against Terrorism. Those and several other declarations were quoted in my United Press International article on 19 September, 2002, and also posted on FreeRepublic. The Barbary Pirate War ended with two peace treaties, submitted by the President and approved by the Senate. This war will end the same way.
Please do your homework. Read the declarations of war and the histories, both of which have already been posted on FR. Then you will understand the constitutional legitimacy of the current declaration of war.
Congressman Billybob
Click for latest column on UPI, "Incision Decision in the Senate" (Now up on UPI wire, and FR.)
As the politician formerly known as Al Gore has said, my book, "to Restore Trust in America"
Do your homework. Read the history.
Congressman Billybob
Do your homework. Read the histories. All this has been posted on FR before. The Constitution is being obeyed, not destroyed.
Congressman Billybob
This ruling itself says that there must be judicial review of any detentions.
You really should read the ruling.
Unfortunately, you've got to pass a constitutional amendment. I believe it's the 14th amendment -- designed to give citizenship to the former slaves -- that was written so poorly that later courts ruled that anyone born on US soil became a US citizen.
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.