[Peace-discuss] Fwd: Lendman / The Erosion of Democracy and Freedom in America / Oct 05

[Morton K. Brussel]

Is this statement too strong? Is it wrong?
The $64 x 10^9 question is: Will the courts let it stand? --mkb



>
> ZNet Commentary
> The Erosion of Democracy and Freedom in America October 05, 2006
> By  Stephen Lendman
>
> On December 8, 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt addressed the US  
> Congress the day after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.  He said  
> that "date....will live in infamy" because of what the naval and  
> air forces of the Empire of Japan did.  Two and one-half months  
> later on February 19, 1942, FDR himself committed an infamous  act  
> signing into law Executive Order 9066 which authorized the  
> internment of 120,000 Japanese civilians, two-thirds of whom were  
> US citizens.  These Americans committed no crimes and were only  
> "guilty" of being of Japanese ancestry and thus by presidential  
> edict were judged potential enemies of the state.
>
> Because of FDR's action, these otherwise ordinary peace-loving  
> Americans lost all their sacred constitutional protections  
> including habeas corpus and their rights of trial by jury and to  
> own and keep their property.  They also lost all their other  
> freedoms and were treated like criminals. They were sent against  
> their will to concentration camps where they were interned for the  
> duration of the war until 1946.
>
> It should be noted no similar action was taken against white German  
> Americans. It seems the Japanese then were more guilty of their  
> skin color and race than their country of national origin. The US  
> Supreme Court agreed in their 1944 landmark Korematsu v. United  
> States decision in which a Court majority ruled military necessity  
> justified their internment. Justice Frank Murphy and two other  
> Justices disagreed denouncing the decision. In Justice Murphy's  
> dissent, he said this act amounted to the "legalization of racism."
>
> It took until 1988 for the US Congress to undue this presidential  
> act of infamy and High Court approval of it. It then passed Public  
> Law 100-383 apologizing to those internees still living and their  
> families, provided reparations for them (too late and far too  
> inadequate), and created a public education fund to "inform the  
> public about the internment of such individuals so as to prevent  
> the recurrence of any similar event (ever again)."
>
> Dare anyone suggest members of the 109th Congress have an immediate  
> and urgent need for an industrial strength dose of its own re- 
> education program.  On two late September, 2006 days of infamy, the  
> US House and Senate passed and sent to President Bush for his  
> certain signature the Military Commissions Act of 2006  
> appropriately called "the torture authorization bill." This clear  
> unconstitutional act gives the administration extraordinary powers  
> to detain, interrogate and prosecute alleged terror suspects and  
> anyone thought to be their supporters.  The law grants the  
> executive branch (specifically President Bush) the extraordinary  
> right to label anyone anywhere in the world an "unlawful enemy  
> combatant" and gives him the legal right to arrest and incarcerate  
> them indefinitely in military prisons.
>
> Persons liable will include anyone who even innocently contributes  
> financially to a charitable organization thought to be associated  
> with any nation or group the US believes supports terrorist or  
> hostile actions against the US.
>
> On September 27 and 28, 2006, freedom and justice effectively died  
> in the US, and no one will be secure anywhere in the world as long  
> as this act is the law of the land.  One day it will be repealed -  
> if the republic survives long enough to do it which now is very  
> much in question.
>
> US citizens are not exempted from this law with one important  
> exception - for now at least.  Because of the June, 2004 Supreme  
> Court Hamdi v. Rumsfeld decision, citizens of this country legally  
> still retain their legal right to file a writ of habeas corpus if  
> arrested and detained. This means they must be charged with a  
> crime, be tried and allowed the right to appeal any conviction in a  
> US court of law. But even this remaining right now hangs by a weak  
> thread as the case of Jose Padilla shows.  He's a US citizen who  
> was seized at Chicago's O'Hare Airport having no weapons, declared  
> an "enemy combatant" and held in military confinement with no  
> ability to challenge his confinement in court.
>
> The Supreme Court refused to hear his case, effectively giving the  
> president the power to seize other citizens, subject them to the  
> same abuse with no redress and thereby neutralize anyone's habeas  
> rights.
>
> But it may get even worse than that if, or more likely when,  
> another major "terrorist" attack occurs on US soil, which some  
> experts believe is a certainty. Congress could then suspend habeas  
> rights for everyone, or the president could do it by executive  
> order in the name of national security.  If it happens, democracy  
> will likely give way to martial law, the suspension of the  
> constitution, and echos of Benjamin Franklin's words at the close  
> of the Constitutional Convention in 1787 will be heard.  At that  
> time, he reportedly said in answer to whether the nation now had a  
> republic or a monarchy: "A republic, if you can keep it."  We  
> hardly need wonder what he'd say today.
>
> Provisions in the Military Commissions Act
>
> Some of the key elements of the Military Commissions Act are as  
> follows:
>
> -- It annuls the right of habeas corpus for all non-US citizens and  
> applies it retroactively to all current detainees at Guantanamo and  
> elsewhere. 
>
>  Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution specifically says:"The  
> Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended,  
> unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may  
> require it."  This provision is now constitutionally null and void  
> for all non-US citizens and nearly so for those of us who are.
>
> -- It empowers the president with authority to decide what  
> constitutes torture, effectively legalizing this act of barbarism  
> henceforth against any detainee anywhere including US citizens.
>
> -- It grants US officials, including CIA operatives, retroactive  
> immunity from prosecution for having authorized the use of torture  
> or directly committed acts of it.
>
> -- It prohibits detainees from invoking the protections of the  
> Geneva Conventions or using them in any US court.  These  
> conventions are binding international laws and thus the supreme law  
> of the land. No longer with the passage of this act.
>
> -- It gives the chief executive authority to interpret and apply  
> the Geneva Conventions according to his sole judgment.
>
> -- It grants the president the right to convene military  
> commissions to try "unlawful enemy combatants" and gives the chief  
> executive broad latitude to decide on his sole authority whomever  
> he wishes to so-designate and for whatever reason.
>
> -- It allows civilians to be tried by military commissions and not  
> in a civilian court of law and limits the rights of detainees to be  
> represented by the counsel of their choice.
>
> -- It allows no guarantee trials will be conducted within a  
> reasonable time.
>
> -- In violation of binding international law, it permits torture- 
> extracted evidence to be used against the accused in a trial.
>
> -- It allows the use of classified evidence to be used but not to  
> be made available to be challenged by defendants.
>
> -- It permits hearsay evidence and coerced testimony to be used.
>
> -- It allows military commissions to impose death sentences.
>
> -- It allows indefinite and secret detentions.
>
> On September 21, 2001, Amnesty International faxed a letter to  
> George Bush in the aftermath of the 9/11 attack.  It urged the  
> president to respect human rights and the rule of law in whatever  
> response was to be undertaken.  Specifically it said: "In the wake  
> of a crime of such magnitude, principled leadership becomes  
> crucial....We urge you to lead your government to take every  
> necessary human rights precaution in the pursuit of justice."  Five  
> years later, Amnesty concluded "its appeal fell on deaf ears.  The  
> past five years have seen the USA engage in systematic violations  
> of international law, with a distressing impact on thousands of  
> detainees and their families." Amnesty cited the following violations:
>
> -- secret detentions
>
> -- enforced disappearances
>
> -- the use of torture and other cruel and degrading treatment
>
> -- outrages of personal dignity including humiliating treatment
>
> -- denial of habeas rights
>
> -- indefinite detentions without charges or trials
>
> -- prolonged detentions incommunicado
>
> -- arbitrary detention
>
> -- unfair trial procedures
>
> Amnesty accused the Bush administration of hypocrisy saying that  
> while claiming the US is a "nation of laws" adhering to the "rule  
> of law," it practices the very policies it condemns. It said this  
> administration's "interpretation of the law has been driven by its  
> policy choices rather than a credible postulation of its legal  
> obligations."  It cynically interprets US and international law any  
> way it chooses and as such acts outrageously and in contempt of all  
> legal standards and norms.
>
> Amnesty also stated that by having passed the Military Commissions  
> Act, the Congress has allowed thousands of detainees to remain in  
> indefinite detention without charge or trial and to be legally  
> subjected to the worst kinds of abuses.  It said "Congress has  
> failed these detainees and their families.  Those defending human  
> rights should be prepared for a long struggle."
>
> The Long Struggle to Save the Republic Has Begun
>
> By its legislative action prior to recessing for the November  
> congressional elections, the 109th Congress will forever live in  
> infamy. It shamelessly sunk to its lowest yet depths in pledging  
> its fealty to a morally depraved president who believes no one has  
> the right to challenge his authority, champions the use of torture,  
> defies constitutional and international laws and norms, (law or no  
> law) conducts secret surveillance through warrentless wiretaps or  
> any other means, and believes dissent is an act of terrorism.
>
> In brazen defiance of over 200 years of governance under the rule  
> of constitutional law, this Congress and president have made a  
> mockery of every norm and standard the Founders stood for and  
> handed down to us for posterity - if we could keep it.
>
> By their actions, this body has shaken the very foundation of the  
> republic. It gave the president near-unlimited authority to act as  
> he chooses in the name of national security as he defines it. It  
> simply means the rule of law effectively has been abolished and  
> ordinary people no longer have constitutionally protected rights.   
> For now, US citizens still have the right of habeas corpus, but it,  
> too, may be taken from us in the name of national security.  How  
> low we've now sunk in coming so far.
>
> In his 1935 novel, It Can't Happen Here, Sinclair Lewis showed it  
> most certainly can happen here.  He wrote about a charismatic  
> senator who becomes president, claims to be a reformer and a  
> champion of the common man. It's all cover to hide his alliance  
> with the corporate interests of his day and the support of  
> religious extremists he appeals to. Instead of serving the people  
> he denies them their rights.
>
> He then takes full advantage of the Great Depression economic  
> crisis to support a strong military and pass unconstitutional laws  
> during a national emergency. He further convenes military tribunals  
> for civilians and calls dissenters unpatriotic and even traitors.  
> Sound familiar?
>
> Anyone reading this book will be scared wondering if it really can  
> happen here. Anyone living in the surreal age of George Bush and  
> his out-of-control extremist neocon administration knows it already  
> has, and we haven't yet found a way to stop it. This is no time for  
> complacency.
>
> Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at  
> lendmanstephen at sbcglobal.net.  Also visit his blog site at  
> sjlendman.blogspot.com.
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20061005/afb63b61/attachment.htm