Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act of 2010

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-09-10 12:52 AM
Original message
The Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act of 2010
Edited on Tue Mar-09-10 12:59 AM by Subdivisions
Edited to add: Bill introduced by Sen. John McCain and supported by Sen. Joseph Lieberman...

WASHINGTON - March 4 - A bill introduced today in the Senate would hand the government the power to indefinitely detain terrorism suspects without charge or trial, dealing a swift blow to due process and the rule of law.

The Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act of 2010, introduced by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), would also create an entirely new system of interrogation by requiring intelligence officials to be consulted about how to handle terrorism suspects after their capture. The bill was precipitated by misguided objections to the Obama administration's correct decision to charge accused Christmas Day attacker Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in the criminal court system. The legislation would have a "high value detainee" team, made up of members of different intelligence agencies, interrogate and determine whether alleged terrorist suspects are "unprivileged enemy belligerents." If so, and if the suspect is then charged, the legislation would mandate the use of the discredited and unconstitutional military commissions.

The American Civil Liberties Union vigorously opposes the Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act.

...snip...

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/senators-mccain-and-lieberman-introduce-bill-authorize-indefinite-detention


Here is the text of the bill: http://assets.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/ARM10090.pdf
And, an article from The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/a-detention-bill-you-ought-to-read-more-carefully/37116

And excerpt from The Atlantic:

A Detention Bill You Ought to Read More Carefully

Why is the national security community treating the "Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010," introduced by Sens. John McCain and Joseph Lieberman on Thursday as a standard proposal, as a simple response to the administration's choices in the aftermath of the Christmas Day bombing attempt? A close reading of the bill suggests it would allow the U.S. military to detain U.S. citizens without trial indefinitely in the U.S. based on suspected activity. Read the bill here, and then read the summarized points after the jump.
According to the summary, the bill sets out a comprehensive policy for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected enemy belligerents who are believed to have engaged in hostilities against the United States by requiring these individuals to be held in military custody, interrogated for their intelligence value and not provided with a Miranda warning.

(There is no distinction between U.S. persons--visa holders or citizens--and non-U.S. persons.)

It would require these "belligerents" to be coded as "high-value detainee(s)" to be held in military custody and interrogated for their intelligence value by a High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team established by the president. (The H.I.G., of course, was established to bring a sophisticated interrogation capacity to the federal justice system.)

...snip...

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/a-detention-bill-you-ought-to-read-more-carefully/37116
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
gmoney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-09-10 12:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. The Jack Bauer Law
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-09-10 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
2. Are we supposed to pretend these guys are acting in good faith?
This legislation is bullshit. They should be embarrassed. This is like something from The Onion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-09-10 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
3. Why am I not surprised that Holy Joe is in on it?
Scumbag.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-09-10 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. I can't think of a better argument for term limits
These guys have been in the Senate way too long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomThoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-09-10 01:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. Justice is the first target of tyranny.
Edited on Tue Mar-09-10 01:32 AM by RandomThoughts
If it is true that it would give reason for detention beyond the 48 hour rule, without showing a reason it is another claim to totalitarianism.

If the article is true, it is trying to remove the concept of having a just system.


That type of system is what led to 'disappeared' people in third world countries during totalitarian regimes.

The parts of the bill below state that if the Secretary of Defense and Attorney General, with notification of the president and congress, decide a person is a suspected of being hostile, then they lose rights.

This specifically turns all justice over to the discretion of the Attorney General and Secretary of Defense based on a recommendation from an interrogators opinion. Any decision made by Attorney General and Secretary of Defense is final decision with no other rule. Those two people can decide anything they want with no check except notification of what they chose to do.

I would be interesting if such determinations would also be classified so that nobody knows what happened to disappeared people.

It is a totalitarian bill, sure you could say they would only use it on bad people, but what if someone thought a political opponent, because of his different views, was a bad person. What if running in an election on defense department cuts was determined by some future Attorney General and Secretary of Defense as being hostile to US interest. It puts in place a legal frame work for no rights governing detention.

It is a declaration of totalitarianism. where is judicial review? where is requirement of evidence?

On a side note, within the context of that ruling, with that same authority, I could declare Lieberman and McCain hostile to the United States and the Constitution. Hostile to ideas of justice, and deserving of no rights and under indefinite detention. And even worse could do the same with anyone else even if it was only because I did not like them. You might say I don't have the power so that so it is not relevant, but what if someone who though like I just wrote was in those positions? How would you stop them? How could you even argue your claims?

Courts exist to test the claims of ideas, that bill lets any idea lead to any level of incarceration without public or civil review.


MILITARY CUSTODY REQUIREMENT.Whenever
4 within the United States, its territories, and possessions,
5 or outside the territorial limits of the United States, an
6 individual is captured or otherwise comes into the custody
7 or under the effective control of the United States who
8 is suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United
9 States or its coalition partners through an act of ter
10 rorism, or by other means in violation of the laws of war,
11 or of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities,
12 and who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent, the
13 individual shall be placed in military custody for purposes
14 of initial interrogation and determination of status in ac
15 cordance with the provisions of this Act.


(1) PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION BY HIGH
16 VALUE DETAINEE INTERROGATION GROUP.The
17 high-value detainee interrogation group responsible
18 for interrogating a high-value detainee under sub
19 section (b) shall make a preliminary determination
20 whether or not the detainee is an unprivileged enemy
21 belligerent. The interrogation group shall make such
22 determination based on the result of its interroga
23 tion of the individual and on all intelligence informa
24 tion available to the interrogation group. The inter
25 rogation group shall, after consultation with the Di-

1 rector of National Intelligence, the Director of the
2 Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Director of
3 the Central Intelligence Agency, submit such deter
4 mination to the Secretary of Defense and the Attor
5 ney General.
6 (2) FINAL DETERMINATION.As soon as pos
7 sible after receipt of a preliminary determination of
8 status with respect to a high-value detainee under
9 paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense and the At
10 torney General shall jointly submit to the President
11 and to the appropriate committees of Congress a
12 final determination whether or not the detainee is an
13 unprivileged enemy belligerent for purposes of this
14 Act. In the event of a disagreement between the Sec
15 retary of Defense and the Attorney General, the
16 President shall make the final determination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Sep 22nd 2021, 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC