And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” – whatever that means.

INVESTIGATE, INDICT, IMPEACH, IMPRISON!

I wasn’t gonna write, because Ron Lewis (R-KY) has been such a rubber stamp asshole, and because he’s quitting the House (Yay!!), but what the hell, might as well help hit the 100K mark.

L.A. Confidential @ 1:

And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” – whatever that means.

Do you have a source where we can view who voted for/against this bill?

I got an email reply from my Senator the next day, and am waiting to see if my Congressman replies by mail. I think it worth posting as everyone is aware of the smear machine in action when it roundly attacked Durbin’s patriotism

Thank you for contacting me about our nation’s policies regarding the detention and trial of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and throughout the world. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue and share your concerns.

In July 2006, I visited the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay and spoke with American servicemembers stationed there. The courage and commitment of our men and women in uniform cannot be doubted. The troops serving at Guantanamo have a difficult job, and they deserve our gratitude for their dedicated service to our country in the struggle against terrorism. However, since September 11, 2001, the Bush Administration has bent some of the time-honored rules of warfare regarding the treatment of prisoners. In doing so they have made the job of our soldiers even more difficult, abandoned values we cherish as Americans, and harmed our image in the rest of the world.

Our men and women in uniform are trained to follow the rule of law, the Geneva Conventions, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Yet the Bush Administration has repeatedly attempted to reverse these well-established laws of war. It unilaterally set aside the Geneva Conventions against the recommendation of then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, who argued that the decision would “reverse over a century of U.S. policy and practice,” “undermine the protections of the law of war for our own troops,” and “undermine public support among critical allies, making military cooperation more difficult to sustain.” The Justice Department went so far as to redefine the meaning of torture, asserting that only pain equivalent to organ failure or death would qualify. This limited definition became official Administration policy for more than two years before it was withdrawn under public pressure.

The Administration also unilaterally created a new prisoner detention policy, which was struck down by the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld for its failure to comply with American laws and treaty obligations. In the Hamdan decision, the Supreme Court essentially reminded the President that no one is above the law, even during a time of war.

Two months before last year’s November elections, the Administration proposed new legislation to recreate a military commission system and to redefine what interrogation tactics the Administration deemed acceptable. I believed the bill, known as the Military Commissions Act, failed two crucial tests. First, it did not create clear standards for the treatment of prisoners or outline a process that we would consider fair if applied by other countries to American prisoners. Second, the bill was inconsistent with our Constitution and the fundamental values of our nation. It eliminated the fundamental protection of habeas corpus, meaning that individuals - including legal residents of the United States - could be detained indefinitely without the opportunity to challenge their detention in court. I voted against the bill, but it was passed by Congress and signed into law by the President.

Since the November 2006 election, Congress has been reconsidering our nation’s detention policies. I am a cosponsor of the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007. The measure would restore the ability of our federal courts to consider habeas corpus petitions that cannot be considered under the Military Commissions Act. The bill was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and awaits further consideration by the Senate.

I also believe it is time to close Guantanamo and transfer the prisoners there to other secure facilities where we can show from the outset that the Geneva Conventions and appropriate provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice are being followed. Defense Secretary Robert Gates also believes Guantanamo should be closed and has worked to prevent the building of a new courthouse at the facility. We must make it clear to the world that, despite the threat of terrorism, America will follow the rule of law as we work to keep our citizens safe.

Our enemies in the war on terror have committed atrocities against American soldiers and others whom they have taken prisoner. I condemn this hideous behavior in the strongest terms, and the perpetrators of these atrocities must be found and brought to justice. In our own detention practices, the United States must hold itself to the same high moral values we stand for in other circumstances. We must prove to the rest of the world that the values we hold dear as Americans - freedom, human dignity, and the rule of law - continue to guide us regardless of the challenges we face. Closing Guantanamo and restoring the right of habeas corpus will help us make that case.
Thank you again for your message.

Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin

United States Senator

RJD/tf
P.S. If you are ever visiting Washington, please feel free to join Senator Obama and me at our weekly constituent coffee. When the Senate is in session, we provide coffee and donuts every Thursday at 8:30 a.m. as we hear what is on the minds of Illinoisans and respond to your questions. We would welcome your participation. Please call my D.C. office for more details.

“Forced” being the key word. Wonder what that means. Obey or face torture and abuse?

AP - 1 hour, 38 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The State Department is warning U.S. diplomats they may be forced to serve in Iraq next year and says it will soon start identifying prime candidates for jobs at the Baghdad embassy and outlying provinces, according to a cable obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press.

L.A. Confidential @ 1:

And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” – whatever that means.

LA

Consider the date ……..2 months prior to the election that changed the balance of power in Congress.

War criminals deserve to rot in jail- or in BushCo’s case, I’d be open to capital punishment.
I know Georgie has a favorite, well worn electric chair back home…

Matt Hussein in Texas @ 4:

L.A. Confidential @ 1:

And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” – whatever that means.

Do you have a source where we can view who voted for/against this bill?

I see if it’s available.

L.A. Confidential @ 9:

Matt Hussein in Texas @ 4:

L.A. Confidential @ 1:

And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” – whatever that means.

Do you have a source where we can view who voted for/against this bill?

I see if it’s available.

Only one representative, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), verbally contested this act, noting that 2007’s Defense Authorization Act contained a “widely opposed provision to allow the President more control over the National Guard [adopting] changes to the Insurrection Act, which will make it easier for this or any future President to use the military to restore domestic order without the consent of the nation’s governors.”

Matt Hussein in Texas @ 4:

L.A. Confidential @ 1:

And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” – whatever that means.

Do you have a source where we can view who voted for/against this bill?

I believe the reference is to the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Here is ACLU page.

This act is an abomination, the ACLU attempted a constitutional challenge but the Supreme Court declined to hear it.

The Senate and House will have pages showing the vote, I will look.

Voter Information

Key Civil Liberties Votes in Congress

S. 3930 - Military Commissions Act of 2006
Passed: September 29, 2006
Senate 65 YEAS; 34 NAYS; 1 Not Voting

[I gave you a break and provided the link to the roll call break down. Please do not do bandwidth hogging posts like that. Just use the link. ~Site Monitor]

H.R. 6166 [109th]: Military Commissions Act of 2006 (Vote On Passage)
House Vote #491 — Sep 27, 2006
Ayes: 253 (58%)
Nays: 168 (39%)
No Vote: 12 (3%)
[deleted–Are you kidding me? 534 votes listed in a row? Just link it, don’t hog bandwidth like that~Site Monitor]

Alice Hussein (the Bitter are for Obama) @ 11:

Matt Hussein in Texas @ 4:

L.A. Confidential @ 1:

And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” – whatever that means.

Do you have a source where we can view who voted for/against this bill?

I believe the reference is to the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Here is ACLU page.

This act is an abomination, the ACLU attempted a constitutional challenge but the Supreme Court declined to hear it.

The Senate and House will have pages showing the vote, I will look.

The final vote in the House is here.

The final vote in the Senate is here.

Dan Froomkin wrote:

“I have to wonder if, while Bush and the pope talk about their shared values, the subject of human dignity and torture will come up.”

I just watched an ABC cut away Special Report which showed Bush, Laura and Jenna going to Andrews AFB and personally greeting Pope Benedict. Cokie Roberts was crowing about Bush having asked her to ride in the presidential limo with him from the WH to Andrews AFB and discussing the visit during the ride. Gibson stated that it was remarkable for Bush to go to Andrews to meet a head of state and that this is the first time he’s done so. Bush, Laura and Jenna were all very folksy at the AFB - where 500 military families had been invited to greet the Pope, and where, of course, no pesky protesters were anywhere near.

Then Charlie Gibson, doing the in studio anchoring, interviewed the papal ABC expert and asked him why the Pope wasn’t attending the WH dinner in his honor or was being invited to the residence where the Pope is staying for the dinner being held there in his honor. The “expert” simply shrugged his shoulders and said it was “odd.”

Bush is so transparently using airtime and video with him and the Pope to create a shiny object and a false impression of Papal approval. ABC is doing very deliberate disappearing of Bush’s admission of torture approval and involvement. And they are re-presenting Bush in a warm, fuzzy soft focus “human” light.

The expert twice stated that the purpose of the papal visit is to speak to human rights. Gibson repeated that and uttered nary a word about Bush or torture.

That wasn’t stenography; it was disappearing ink and a David Blaine disappearing act.

This is very scary - everyone in the media is eerily and dangerously silent. How are they being pressured and intimidated, and what is the implication for us?
 
I wrote to ABC’s World News Tonight requesting/demanding full investigation and reportage of Bush and torture.  But it’s clear that it is spinning the “story’ to distort and hide any link between Bush and torture and to show him in the most favorable, albeit illegitimate, light implying Papal approval of Bush around human rights.

I’m sorry , Alice

I couldn’t resist posting their names ………………..

I got this reply….

Dear Mr. XXXXX:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the use of “waterboarding” as a method of interrogation. I appreciate hearing from you.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) uses a variety of interrogation tactics on terrorist detainees. Some of these techniques involve stress methods. The effectiveness of one technique popularly known as “waterboarding” was revealed in the interrogation of Al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM), the mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. After being captured by U.S. forces, KSM refused to cooperate with interrogators. By employing the so-called waterboarding technique, U.S. interrogators had some success. KSM’s revelations allowed authorities to prevent at least six terrorist attacks within the United States.

The United States must not engage in torture and I believe all interrogation techniques must be strictly monitored to prevent abuse and undue use. Although stress methods are not preferred, they may have become necessary to protect our national security and the security of our nation’s allies. However, it is not in my expertise to know whether “waterboarding” is an acceptable method to potentially save thousands of lives, but I have serious concerns.

Thank you for keeping in touch with me. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me again. I also encourage you to visit my Web site, which may be found on-line at www.Souder.House.gov.

Sincerely,

Mark Souder
Member of Congress

As a dark lord of the sith once said …. “So?”

Final passage in the Senate
Party AYE NAY ABS
Republicans 53 1 1
Democrats 12 32 0
Independent 0 1 0
Total 65 34 1

Final passage in the House
Party AYE NAY ABS
Republicans 218 7 5
Democrats 32 162 7
Independent 0 1 0
Total 250 170 12

MCMetal @ 16:

I’m sorry , Alice

I couldn’t resist posting their names ………………..

I’m not paying for the bandwidth so there is no problem here.

The ayes are names that will live in infamy.

Max Power @ 17:

I got this reply….

Dear Mr. XXXXX:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the use of “waterboarding” as a method of interrogation. I appreciate hearing from you.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) uses a variety of interrogation tactics on terrorist detainees. Some of these techniques involve stress methods. The effectiveness of one technique popularly known as “waterboarding” was revealed in the interrogation of Al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM), the mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. After being captured by U.S. forces, KSM refused to cooperate with interrogators. By employing the so-called waterboarding technique, U.S. interrogators had some success. KSM’s revelations allowed authorities to prevent at least six terrorist attacks within the United States.

The United States must not engage in torture and I believe all interrogation techniques must be strictly monitored to prevent abuse and undue use. Although stress methods are not preferred, they may have become necessary to protect our national security and the security of our nation’s allies. However, it is not in my expertise to know whether “waterboarding” is an acceptable method to potentially save thousands of lives, but I have serious concerns.

Thank you for keeping in touch with me. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me again. I also encourage you to visit my Web site, which may be found on-line at www.Souder.House.gov.

Sincerely,

Mark Souder
Member of Congress

So sweet of Souder to basically tell you to go fuck yourself , isn’t it ?

What a typical GOP piece of shit he is………………..

“You can contact them here and demand that they follow up their reporting on torture by pushing it into the Presidential race.”

Umm . . . Maybe it would be more effective to politely request that they bring it up at the debate, rather than demanding that they do so. Hey, ABC’s the good guy here, right? They aired a story that no other network would. Let’s not alienate them needlessly.

And, yet, this guy, Lt. Commander Michael Diaz, lands in the brig and bankrupt. Well, at least not MORALLY bankrupt.

Thanks everyone. it’s going very well. We have a few actions to follow up.

Alice Hussein (the Bitter are for Obama) @ 14:

Alice Hussein (the Bitter are for Obama) @ 11:

Matt Hussein in Texas @ 4:

L.A. Confidential @ 1:

Do you have a source where we can view who voted for/against this bill?

I believe the reference is to the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Here is ACLU page.

This act is an abomination, the ACLU attempted a constitutional challenge but the Supreme Court declined to hear it.

The Senate and House will have pages showing the vote, I will look.

The final vote in the House is here.

The final vote in the Senate is here.

Hereis Rachel Maddow recently revisiting Keith Olbermann’s special comment of October 2006 made just after the INFAMOUS Military Commissions Act was passed.

roooth @ 2:

INVESTIGATE, INDICT, IMPEACH, IMPRISON!

I would add [Deleted. We ask that posters not advocate violence at this site, even if it is legal, state sanctioned violence-Sitemonitor]

“By employing the so-called waterboarding technique, U.S. interrogators had some success. KSM’s revelations allowed authorities to prevent at least six terrorist attacks within the United States.”
-Mark Souder to Max Power.

Prove it, Souder. I think you are lying. In fact, I know you are lying. You bought 10 pounds of bullshit and it was delivered to you in a 5 pound sack. No one in intelligence is going to tell a lowly congresscritter anything.

Great work John.

Thanks.

I just sent my letter along, with the title “I just paid my taxes and have $3 left.” With it being tax day and all, maybe a little reminder that WE pay the bills…

Is this a state visit, or is the Pope really here to perform an exorcism on Dick Cheney?

I am writing you as an Iraqi War Veteran and 13 year military member honorably discharged.

Every year we were given courses in the Laws of War and the Geneva convention.

Permitting, conducting, and in any way participating in torture was considered a war crime. Torture was strictly defined with no wiggle room.

We need to prosecute war criminals who facilitate torture, especially if they pretend to represent America and American values.

The President’s Security Council all facilitated torture. If we do not prosecute these war criminals, then we tell every soldier that the Geneva convention and the Laws of War mean nothing. It will turn into a bloody free for all sanctioned by an administration that no one seems to have the courage to hold accountable for their treachery.
Thanks so much.

Here’s what I just sent to World News Tonight:

Since ABC brought up the issue of torture on ABC I think it is not only highly appropriate that you ask Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama questions about the issue of torture (do they think it is LEGAL and within the framework of the Constitution they are both so eager to preserve, protect and to defend etc.), but I believe it is absolutely NECESSARY that you do so.

Here is a link to yet another disgusting example of how our military has tortured:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....1?detail=f

Thank you in advance for taking my request into the most serious consideration. The American public has a right to know Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama’s positions on this tragic episode in our country’s history.

Thanks to all of you who supplied the info on the vote. There’s some Congress-types who’ve got some ’splainin’ to do……

I am so glad that people are responding to call for the Congress to do something about this. Torture should not be a part of the American way of life. Nor should it be advocated by anyone who believes in a free and just society. It is horrible that we have leaders who willingly advocate this without any feelings of remorse or compassion. It is about time that justice be brought to the American people. If we don’t, it is as if we’re behind the war crimes committed in the name of this country.

Will Bush admit to his war crimes? Will he pardon the Japanese troops that we convicted for the same crime?

emailed ABC asking them for more on this. Thanks John for the links!

L.A. Confidential @ 10, As one of my Senators I’m usually pretty happy with Leahy because he seems to be aware of what’s going on and willing to speak out. BUT when the Abu Ghraib story first broke I wrote him asking for Rumsfields removal. He wrote me back telling me he’s know Rumsfield for years and what a great guy and dinner companion he was. While I still think he’s not a bush-dog at all I’m keeping my eye on him.

BennyP @ 8, I’m a huge fan of the works of Doestoevski so for the most part I’m against capital punishment but indeed this case does seem to warrant it