Horror

[flexibeast]

i am horrified, but not surprised.

The US Senate has just passed a horrifying bill. The bill:

authorises special military tribunals to prosecute the Guantanamo detainees, allows for secret CIA-run prisons and forbids "cruel and unusual" punishment of detainees, without further clarification of what falls in that category.

Detainees will be deprived of all legal recourse to protest the conditions of their detention.

Even more disturbingly, the bill

authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights.

"This dangerous compromise," Professor Ackerman continued, "not only authorizes the president to seize and hold terrorists who have fought against our troops 'during an armed conflict,' it also allows him to seize anybody who has 'purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.' This grants the president enormous power over citizens and legal residents. They can be designated as enemy combatants if they have contributed money to a Middle Eastern charity, and they can be held indefinitely in a military prison."

Scary enough for you? But wait, there is more. The legislation also appears to allow illegally-obtained evidence-- from overseas or right here at home-- to be used against enemy combatants (which gives you an idea of where this Congress really stands on the National Security Agency's domestic spying program). And wait, there is this: the Administration's horrible track record when it comes to identifying "enemy combatants" and then detaining them here in the States. Two of the most famous ones, Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, both ended up having the highest courts in our land back up their legal claims, which is why the government had to release Hamdi outright and then turn Padilla over to the regular civilian courts (where he is a defendant in a weak case against him).

[ "This Time, Congress Has No Excuse" ]

Articles across the Web are lamenting the apparent death of the notion of habeas corpus in US law - a notion dating back to at least 14th century CE England.

Someone once said:

Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, ratified by the United States and more than 130 other countries since 1984, forbids governments from deliberately inflicting severe physical or mental pain or suffering on those within their custody or control. Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit. . . . No people, no matter where they reside, should have to live in fear of their own government. Nowhere should the midnight knock foreshadow a nightmare of state-commissioned crime.

The person who said that was current US President George W. Bush, in a speech on United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture - the very same man who is about to sign into law the bill described above.

Update: The New York Times has more unpleasant details in their editorial, "Rushing Off a Cliff".

Update, 30.9.2006: Apparently there are numerous "CIA, military, and FBI professionals" who

are very concerned that the proposals now before the Congress, concerning how to handle detainees suspected of terrorist activities, run the risk of squandering the greatest resource our country enjoys in fighting the dictators and extremists who want to destroy us — our commitment as a nation to the rule of law and the protection of divinely granted human rights.

Apart from the moral considerations, we believe it is important that the Congress send a clear message that torture is not an effective or useful tactic.

This quote was taken from this letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
 

Comments

[candika.livejournal.com]

GetUp has been circulating a petition about this I got it about a week ago, I think. I'll find the address...

http://www.getup.org.au/index.asp

[gendertrash.livejournal.com]

this is really scary

[flexibeast.livejournal.com]

Ah, okay . . . . i wonder how effective such a campaign would be, though, given that people keep on endorsing our federal government's current foreign affairs policy (and by extension, current US foreign policy) by re-electing them? Even if it's suggested that people aren't particularly basing their re-electing behaviour on current foreign policy, that suggests that most Australians don't really give a damn as long as it doesn't affect them too personally (which i reckon is pretty much currently the case) - which in turn suggests that most Australians are happy to let the US led us where they will. :-/

[flexibeast.livejournal.com]

Indeed. :-( Thanks for re-posting stuff about this issue, though. :-)

[candika.livejournal.com]

I find it terrifying that Australians are so eager to turn their political will over to somebody else. The administration seems to just go along with whatever George Bush wants.

[candika.livejournal.com]

I don't know if it would be effective at all.The US has no reason to take our wishes into account because they know that Howard will just roll over to anything they say. Our government is not to be trusted because they don't serve out own interests any more and a lot of Australians are too cynical and apathetic to believe they do. But it will effect us personally if the government brings in legislation similar to the Americans. None of us will be safe then.

[flexibeast.livejournal.com]

*nod* Indeed. But then, as things currently stand, Australians are already 24 times more likely to have our phones tapped than Americans (http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2006/669/669p4d.htm) . . . .