// you’re reading...

Uncategorized

Congress Gives Bush Broad New Powers

The New York Times:

The U.S. Senate approved a measure on Thursday on the interrogations and trials of terrorism suspects, establishing far-reaching rules to deal with what President George W. Bush has called the most dangerous combatants in a different type of war.

The vote was 65 to 34. It was cast after more than 10 hours of often impassioned debate that touched on the Constitution, the horrors of Sept. 11 and the role of the United States in the world.

Both parties also positioned themselves for the continuing clash over national security going into the homestretch of the midterm elections.

The bill would set up rules for the military commissions that will allow the government to proceed with the prosecutions of high-level detainees including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, considered the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

It would make illegal several broadly defined abuses of detainees, while leaving it to the president to establish specific permissible interrogation techniques. And it would strip detainees of a habeas corpus right to challenge their detentions in court.

The bill is the same as one that the House passed, eliminating the need for a conference between the two chambers. The House is expected to approve the Senate bill in a perfunctory vote on Friday, sending it to the president to be signed.

The bill was a compromise between the White House and three Republican senators who had resisted what they saw as Bush’s effort to rewrite the nation’s obligations under the Geneva Conventions. Although the president had to relent on some major provisions, the vote allows him to claim victory in achieving a main legislative priority.

"As our troops risk their lives to fight terrorism, this bill will ensure they are prepared to defeat today’s enemies and address tomorrow’s threats," the president said in a statement after the vote.

Republicans argued that the new rules would provide the necessary tools to fight a new kind of enemy.

"Our prior concept of war has been completely altered, as we learned so tragically on Sept. 11, 2001," Senator Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia, said. "And we must address threats in a different way."

Democrats argued that the rules were being rushed through for political gain too close to a major election and that they would fundamentally threaten the foundations of the American legal system and come back to haunt lawmakers as one of the greatest mistakes in history.

"I believe there can be no mercy for those who perpetrated the crimes of 9/11," Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, said. "But in the process of accomplishing what I believe is essential for our security, we must hold onto our values and set an example that we can point to with pride, not shame."

Twelve Democrats crossed party lines to vote for the bill. One Republican, Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, voted against it.

But provisions of the bill came under criticism from Republicans as well as Democrats, with several crossing lines on amendments that failed along narrow margins.

Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, arguing for an amendment to strike a provision to bar suspects from challenging their detentions in court, said it "is as legally abusive of the rights guaranteed in the Constitution as the actions at Abu Ghraib, Guant

  • Share/Bookmark

Discussion

Comments are disallowed for this post.

  1. Does this mean that private citizens or groups can detain and wiretap gubmint people in the name of “security” too?

    Posted by Wedge Antilles | September 29, 2006, 7:32 am
  2. Scott:

    I believe with this legislation we are now living in a fascist state – albeit one that hasn’t touched the lives of most of middleclass America yet. $300 billion plus has been wasted in Iraq – much of it stolen, and the general consensus is that we are moving toward a military conflict – possibly nuclear with Iran – which would bring $100+ per barrel of oil. This would clearly be inflationary since oil (our oil based ingredients) are used in most manufactured goods. In light of this…………………..
    WHY IS THE DOW AT AN ALL TIME HIGH?
    WHY HAS GOLD MOVED FROM $670 OR SO TO $595?
    I don’t understand the disconnect unless things like deficits don’t mean anything anymore?
    BTW, McCains support for this is shameful. If he opposed it, I’l bet a 1/2 dozen more would have as well. – SC

    Posted by steve C | September 29, 2006, 1:55 pm
  3. I think that this law passing is truely a major stepping stone toward totalitarianism in America. We are fucked now.

    This law will never be repealed. You tell anyone who say that those boys dieing in George Bush’s “comma” over there in Iraq are doing so in order that we remain free. You tell them first that they are too stupid to suffer, and then suffer them any way and explain how every single time this country has gone to war the government has grown and freedom has lost. And then call them stupid again.

    Re: the markets: You know, I was just wondering about this yesterday. I’m sure the Saudi dictators are pumping like mad for the Republicans mid-terms, but to see the price of oil drop so much right when all those articles last week about moving ships toward Iran came out… Maybe the investors know that it’s all going to work out, or maybe they’re fools. Bob Dreyfuss is one of those who thinks that the game now is all diplomacy. I always take him seriously. Who knows?

    Hell, why not? Anyone who says boo can simply be Padilla’d away to a dungeon somewhere to die.

    Posted by Scott | September 29, 2006, 5:09 pm
  4. Per GP, a lot of those Republican (the Neo – Cons anyway) were looking to take the Saudis (and OPEC) down. I thought the Saudi’s petrodeollars were pumped back into US Bonds/Notes/Treasuries, not Dow Components – though I know many Saudis are invested in major US Co. I know Dreyfuss has been saying its all diplomacy but Hersh has said we will strike after the elections. Side note: There is a new Greenwald video, IRAQ FOR SALE available for viewing on InformationClearingHouse. Some of the crap that Halliburton is doing is criminal.

    Posted by steve C | September 29, 2006, 7:22 pm
  5. I guess this is what he really meant by Mission Accomplished!!

    Posted by Phil | September 30, 2006, 8:25 am
  6. JAR JAR: In response to the direct threat to the Republic
    mesa propose that the Senate give immediately emergency
    powers to the Supreme Chancellor.

    Uproar. JAR JAR looks a little sheepish.

    Brief silence, then a rolling wave of APPLAUSE. JAR JAR
    beams and bows.

    PALPATINE rises.

    PALPATINE: It is with great reluctance that I have agreed
    to this calling. I love democracy… I love the Republic.
    But I am mild by nature, and I do not desire to see the
    destruction of democracy. The power you give me I will lay
    down when this crisis has abated, I promise you. And as my
    first act with this new authority, I will create a grand
    army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of
    the separatists.

    Posted by Wedge Antilles | September 30, 2006, 9:48 am
  7. Palpatine! Palpatine! Palpatine!

    Posted by Scott | September 30, 2006, 11:54 pm
  8. I make light of this news, but in reality it’s because I’m scared s***less. What the hell is there to say really? As Justin Raimondo says, here we are in Bizarro World.

    Posted by Wedge Antilles | October 1, 2006, 12:02 pm

NEW IRC CHANNEL

Chat with Scott during the show

| Updated Instructions!

 

September 2006
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930