Hamdan: American Government Plans Continued Barbaric Treatment Of Accused

Hamdan (in theory) affirmed the reality of requirements: The law, procedure, and other statutory obligations. Victory for the rule of law. Yet, having lost the battle against Geneva but reaping the lessons, the Administration and Congress now hope to impose the same abuses upon American civilians: Guilty until proven guilty.

There are often crystallized moments in our lives when we know we have to make a decision. I have decided to share with you by emerging belief that America is no longer a safe place to call home. The question: What is to be done to solve this problem and make it safe: One that respects the rule of law?

Action: Visit Ann's blog and ask her why she keeps deleting messages from her comments; and ask if she's aware of this: Ref

Hat tip: Wallen #14 ref

* * *

Fellow RNC party members: If you want your country, vote DNC!

Gonzalez was "concerned" with detainee lawsuits over mistreatment. Ref Discussion. You mean Gonzalez and Congress aren't concerned Americans might bring suit for violations and abuses under the pending legislation?!? The fact that congress is "debating" these Constitutional requirements -- which are not debatable -- shows you the convoluted "thinking" in Congress. Hello, fitness for duty determinations.

Obviously, the DoJ and ABA need to be reminded: Ref: Attorneys, legislators, Judges, and Prosecutors can be indicted for war crimes, and violations of human rights. See #34

Reconsider this lesson of Iraq: Ref Ref Discussion: Despite the setbacks in Iraq, the US proposes to do the same in America. Doesn't the US government realize that they're creating a bigger problem? Iraqis and Lebanese have not rolled over to the abuse; but the abuse has inspired them, as it will likely inspire Americans, to hold the oppressive regimes with greater contempt’s. That is a legitimacy problem for the US government, as it already is with Iraq.

Recall: The Nazis war criminals were treated better than the procedures Member of Congress and the DoJ Staff propose: Ref Look at the procedures and documents, Congress would otherwise have hidden with this legislation: Ref.

American civilians are protected by Geneva. Hamdan affirms Geneva; and any mistreatment of American civilians, in violation of Geneva, would amount to a subsequent round of war crimes Committed, and not prevented by Members of Congress, the DoJ Staff and Cabinet. Not only would Congress be liable for the illegal activity, but they would also be complicit in the failure to investigate the known illegal conduct. Ref

What inspires opposition to America is its inconsistency between its written law and its abuse of power, and disregard for requirements of civility. This legislation, should it illegally be enacted, is likely to inspire (as with Iraq) the very conduct the Congress hopes to thwart.

Solutions

1. Remind others that the idea of bicameralism was to slow this process of speedy rubber stamping. Bicameralism has failed to protect the Constitution. We need to look at Tricameralism. Ref

2. Continue drafting a New Constitution, and work with others to have the requirement to assent to that document; failure to preserve the document must have a meaningful consequence. Ref

3. Encourage others to compel Members of Congress and DoJ Staff to endure first the procedures they say should be applied to others. [Members of Congress and the DoJ Staff are citizens and subject to the same laws: Here's the information that may quickly compel members of Congress and the DoJ Staff to have a taste of what they are doing.] Ref

4. Encourage others to read the flaws with the ticking time bomb scenario. Ref: Those who accuse should be targeted to explain "how they know" that someone should be tortured, detained, or denied rights.

5. Encourage others and the American Bar Association to with the UN General Assembly to help wake up Members of Congress and the Executive Branch. Ref

6. Encourage others to remind the Members of Congress and DoJ Staff that their 5 USC 3331 violations, agreement to violate Geneva Conventions and Human Rights Treaties could subject them to lawful rendering to the Hague. Ref

7. Encourage others to be mindful that the military's losses in Iraq, and the nation's decent into dictatorship increase the chances of a military coup: Ref

* * *The United States continues to descend, as did the Roman Empire, into barbarity. A nation which assents to barbarism cannot survive. It will either destroy itself, or eventually overreach, and incite the world to destroy it from without.

There is no reasonable basis to continue staying in America, and there is no relative advantage to living under these conditions. Take your skills and goals to another land. America does not respect the rule of law. If you do not move quickly, someone with a grudge may turn you in. Don't wait. Once you're in the detention, you may never see the light of day or emerge alive.

The images of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are a real threat of what could soon happen in America. American prisons already abuse prisoners. The new rules will simply send a green light to more cover-ups and violations of rights, even on the innocent.

* * *

Hamdan: Not Good For Prisoners, But Americans Must Put Up With the Abuses

Hamdan specifically affirmed "requirements" as a principle which must be applied. Our Constitution has affirmed the right to a speedy trial, ability to challenge witnesses. These are illegal courts, struck down during the Civil War. The procedures unlawfully send a green light to commit a reign of terror against American civilians.

Recall, innocent civilians in Pakistan, simply accused by others with grudges, were turned over to the United States. They remain in Guantanamo despite no evidence of illegal activity. Congress is saying that the same is acceptable in the United States.

What's most baffling about Hamdan is despite the affirmation that requirements must be followed, the Congress and Executive have plans to strip the Constitutional obligations including public trial, evidence.

Again, the lessons of Hamdan are simple: If power is abused, it will lead to more abuse and reckless results. What's strange with the proposed legislation is that it effectively returns us to the days just after 9-11, and instead of drafting policies that violate prisoners' rights, the current legislation targets all Americans rights.


* * *

It's unacceptable that the precedent of Hamdan is getting turned on its head. rather than comply with the requirements, the government's approach is to broaden the excuse.

The lesson of Hamdan and the Civil war is clear: Civilians are not to be subject to military trials. We are not under martial law. Any attorney in the DoJ Staff that believe for a moment that these tribunals are "acceptable" has clearly failed to review the full range of Lincoln's abuses which were found to be unconstitutional.

It's time to start calling before Congress the American Bar Association personnel in the Criminal Law practice area and get their views of the subject. How are they able to sit by, after years of doing nothing until Hamdan, while these proposals are being debated?

Hamdan said Geneva was a requirement. Those requirements in the Constitution and Geneva also apply to American citizens. The answer is not to broaden the reach of military tribunals, but to narrow the scope of permissible abuses.

There is no basis to deny the protections of the Constitution. The legislation is not only unconstitutional, but the mere fact that in the wake of Hamdan this Congress is debating these issues is a clear sign that DoJ Staff Attorneys have no intention of complying with Hamdan, but broadening the scope of the abuses.

It's time to subject the DoJ Staff attorneys to the same system they say is "good enough" for others:

Deny the DoJ Staff of any expectation of any protection

Deny the DoJ Staff the right to confront accusers

Permit hearsay to be introduced to indict DoJ Staffers for war crimes

Permit DoJ Staffers to be forced to endure interrogations so that they are forced to admit to their illegal conduct

Deny the DoJ Staff any expectation of a speedy or public trial

Deny the DoJ Staff the ability to choose counsel

Deny DoJ Staff access to evidence that may or may not exist

Deny the DoJ Staff the right to be present at their own war crimes trial -- conduct the trials in absentia

Permit future courts to broadly expand trials against the DoJ Staff for violations of pending laws which have yet to be imagined -- yes, fully violating ex post facto, but there's not reason the DoJ Staff should be guaranteed the right not to have that standard violated

* * *

Who, by name, in the DoJ Staff agreed with these proposals? I want their names, and I want them put first on the list of alleged war criminals who are subjected to the same provisions they say "everyone else" should put up with.

What is the basis for "debating" the Constitutional provisions?

Why is "due process" being considered a "debatable point" -- this is a Constitutional right

How have those been involved in these deliberations factored in their 5 USC 3331 obligations to ensure the Constitution is protected, not explained away?

* *

Under the definition of terrorism, DoJ Staff attorneys could be considered to be terrorist-affiliated:

They violate the US laws;

The impose harm on civilians;

They put the US system of government at risk;

They threaten our way of life.

* * *

What happens when the hostile group is within DoJ?

Does DoJ Staff attorney knowledge of illegal activity, but failure to report that activity to DoJ OPR satisfy the "harboring"-element required to indict the DoJ Staff attorney?

What's stopping the American public from establishing similar Grand Juries in secret to similarly try -- in absentia -- named DoJ Staff attorneys: Simply accusing them of war crimes, and carrying out summary judgment?

Public information suggests the DoJ Staff has engaged in, and refused to prevent war crimes. What is stopping the same illegal procedures (proposed to be applied to Americans) from being applied to US Servicemen, and civilians around the globe; when other nations engage in summary executions without presenting evidence, the US has no basis to complain about human rights violations: The US plans to do the same.

Didn't we learn from the McCarthy era: A witch hunt? What's gotten into the minds of those in DoJ who are saying, "We need to do the same" -- if they "just know" someone should be targeted because they are "involved" with terrorism, why isn't the DoJ Staff that is making that accusation put under the spotlight and forced to explain "how they know"?

There is no "appropriate balance" between the Constitution and "something else." You either work with the Constitution, or you are in vocation of the Constitution. Any law professor who argues otherwise should be reviewed for 5 USC 3331 volitions and be the target of a State Bar investigation: Are they serious about their commitment to the US Constitution and the oath they took to it?

* * *

To date, the DoJ has ignored the FISA court this was a "balance". Why should we believe that the DoJ is not going to ignore the new unconstitutional procedures, and simply haul people away in box cars: "Hay, we now they're guilty: It's cheaper to execute them than to keep them around for a Kangaroo trial." Hello Auschwitz.

At this point, the DoJ Staff is already assenting to war crimes. Any prosecutor, lawyer, or court that assents to these illegal procedures could be found to have violated their 5 USC 3331 oath. The Germans did the same after WWII. Nothing is stopping the same from happening here: Wholesale war crimes against DoJ Staff.

* * *

When we hear the words, "Without unduly diverting" personnel from assignments, that's the same as saying:

The US government is going to use its manning problems as an excuse to ignore the laws;

The fact that the US has failed in Iraq, and doesn't have enough manpower, is going to be the pre-text to then engage in other violations of the law, and engage in more reckless disregard of their Constitutional requirements; and

Despite taking an oath to protect the Constitution, the military’s incompetence and manning problems are the pre-text for them to ignore the laws. This was the same absurdity behind the defective Abu Ghraib prison management system.

* * *

If you do not have the resources to comply with the law, then you are no longer a sovereign nation. You are a nation of barbarians.

How long do the DoJ Staffers plan to spend in jail waiting for their war crimes trials under these provisions?

How much fabricated evidence will be used? Alot, as there are not sanctions nor a requirement to produce any evidence. The same abuses we’ve seen (or been denied information about) in Guantanamo are being established for the US citizens.

Congress has no power to make rules which violate the Constitution. Rather, they have a 5 USC 3331 obligation to enforce the law. Anyone who enforces these laws could be found liable for war crimes.

* * *

It's not appropriate for the DoJ Staff to write language that contradicts the Supreme Court in re Hamdan, and have no legal standing to overrule the Supreme court. Rather, these amounts to an illegal conspiracy by Congress and the Executive branch to jointly violate the Constitution, and defy the Judicial Branch: requirements are to be followed, not explained away.

There is no basis for the SecDef to unilaterally act as a judge. It is not lawful for any tribunal to exercise any power, nor implement any procedures which permit a violation of the rules of evidence. These are Federal requirements, and cannot be waived. Anything the DOJ Staff violates or permits to have violated may be lawfully imposed on them during a war crimes trial: Similar disregard for the same laws of procedures.

Unlike a war crimes trial, it is absurd that the US will have a lower standard of evidence that is otherwise required for war crimes. Recall the reason (in part) for the US objection to the International Criminal Court (ICC) is that it would unfairly treat US personnel. It's absurd that the US, despite opposition to the ICC, hoes to have in place procedures that fall well below what the US said was the basis for opposition t the ICC. International lawyers could respond by similarly ignoring treaty obligations to the US, and fail to cooperate with illegal procedures which violate minimal human rights requirements.

Bybee said that torture was fine: Is DoD Staff saying it assents to torture being imposed on the DoJ Staff for purposes of resolving who was or was not involved in war crimes planning?

Why should anyone "count on" the system that is reckless and has been shown to abuse procedures like FISA? We can't get the DoJ AG or the DoJ Staff to comply with secret provisions; there's no reason to believe they'll comply with the looser standards.

* * *

Only 5 of 12 have to agree on the death penalty. That's under 50%. Last time I checked there's a majority of Americans that do not like the RNC. Is the DoJ Staff saying that a majority of non-RNC could "vote" to impose summary justice on the DoJ and "that would be just fine"?

Watch out for America: They are not serious about the rule of law. They want to commit more abuses. They've learned well in Iraq and Guantanamo. now they want free license to use the NSA system to target anyone and impose a reign of terror. Start with the DoJ Staff and lets see if they like their procedures.