Comments on: War, Atrocities, Jurisdiction and Habeas Corpus

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:40:38 +0000

So polititians want to kill innocent civilians in Afghanistan. You speak of people from countries other than our own having the same rights as humans. Perhaps eradicating the oppressive regimes that killed, tortured and neglected their innocent civilians would indeed help the vast majority of the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, with the exception of those who supported the heinous practices to continue. Just a thought. With respect to the political course of action taken, I agree that more preparation and thought should have gone into the process, but the liberties of innocent civilians were being deprived long before we were there. Thanks to the United States, those liberties are being restored day by day.

By: Rob

Rob — Sat, 05 May 2007 19:24:36 +0000

This all about a one world global government. i.e. north American union (Canada + US + Mexico) This is coming fast and we better do something or we the people are going to mean much less than we already do to our government. You need to check this site

(http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/NAU/)

Bush as told federal motor carrier to have in place this year a pilot program for Mexican truck to run freely through out the US so much for the illegal immigration problem the identity theft problem. Our government does not care about its people and we need to stop and change this problem now. Before it is to late. Check out his site

(http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/mondex.html)

We all better wake up because this is coming much faster than anybody can imagine. It won’t matter who runs for pres they put into office who they want or control who they want it is up to the people to sound off and be heard.

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 05 May 2007 18:44:17 +0000

Even our enemies durring WWII were given fair trials and a chance to defrend themselves..

By: Ken Peterson

Ken Peterson — Sat, 05 May 2007 01:36:01 +0000

Great discussion of basic points.
One not emphasised strongly or frequently enough is the error is the idea that people are guilty or bad things just because someone says they are.
What happened to basic reality?
Over and over people who have been accused have been shown to have been innocent.
The argument claiming that these measures are used against terrorists misses the fact that they are most often used against innocent people or people who are guilty of no more than having the wrong name, or of looking somewhat like someone elses, who may or may not be guilty of anything, or of exercising their right to oppose illegal actions by the government.
It is remarkable how rarely the suspensions of basic rights have been applied to people who have actually done something wrong.
Most of the use of these violations of rights have been used to cover up the blunders of the oppressive authority. People are held for years simply because they have wrongly treated and the authorities wish to hide the fact.

I wish everyone to recall the history pre 9/11. How over and over the FBI were told and warned and urged to check out variious people and activities. They didn’t.
The failure was in the use of ordinary, proper and legal investigative tools.
The failure was of ignorance and lack of support in our intelligence agencies such that they couldn’t translate and interpret the information when it was given to them.

It doesn’t matter how much spying or how much holding and disappearing is done, if the people investigating themselves are incompetent, negligent, irresponsilbe and lacking in intelligence and understanding.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:34:55 +0000

In the above article it is stated that the US is presently “at war.” This is not the case. Congress has not declared war, as required by the Constitution, Article I, Section 8. Since Congress has not declared war, any reference to “war” being the excuse for suspending habeas corpus is invalid.
The “war” in Iraq is in fact an illegal, unconstitutional invasion of a nation that was absolutely no threat to the US. There simply was no connection whatsoever between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. None. Zip. Nada. If there was ever a valid reason for the impeachment of a President, the present circumstances are it.
Remember the Constitution give the Congress the power to impeach for “high crimes and misdemeanors” leaving it to Congress to define those terms. If violation of the Constitution by sending troops into battle absent a declaration of war is not a “high crime” I can’t imagine what would be.