Bushes new Torture bill.

Hobbes

Here is what I have heard so far on it.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r109:FLD001:S60332

1. It protects Bush from ever being charged of warcrimes and is backdated .

2. It allows Bush to redefine the geneva convention based on "his interpretation".

3. You can now be held for life without ever being charged of any crime or even seeing a court room. (as long as your not an American)

4. Basically green lights extraordinary rendition.

Ironically it also says that any kind of torture on US military of the same nature can be tried in the US.

Hobbes

Hmmm. It appears I am wrong above.

Turns out that if you are declared "Unlawful combatant" to the bill then you automatically loose your US citizenship.

Guess it does apply to everyone.

.. To add to this appears this bill will go through. Bush is set to sign it this weekend (according to news). In the event it doesn't pass they have a second bill going through very similar.

tallus

Has the bill actually been passed yet? I hope it fails to become law if it has not yet been passed.

Hobbes

As I understand it, it's due to be passed into law this weekend. I guess we can hope for the SCJ declaring it unconstitutional.

I'm pretty sure loosing your nationality is illegal outside of the Geneva convention.

Manic Moran

On the issue of citizenship, the US law on the matter has always been that the government can strip you of citizenship if you act in a manner that indicates that you have no intention of being a good American. If it means that you are left with no citizenship at all, sucks to be you.

NTM

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

1. It protects Bush from ever being charged of warcrimes and is backdated .

I don't know why but this gives me a warm fuzzy feeling deep inside.

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote:

If it means that you are left with no citizenship at all, sucks to be you.

Actually it doesn't. According to International laws it is legally impossible to be without a country.

I know this because this is one of the things that came up in the referendum recently. Basically if a baby is born in Ireland both parents are not Irish and thier home country refuses the child for citizenship the child automatically becomes Irish (due to the same law).

So if they were sent to Gitmo they could techically declare themselves Cuban (as the land is leased). Of course the whole removal of habeas corpus rights in the bill covers that.

Nick_oliveri

Hobbes wrote:

Hmmm. It appears I am wrong above.

I was hoping it was in reagard to one of these points

Hobbes wrote:

1. It protects Bush from ever being charged of warcrimes and is backdated .

Well, surprise surprise. What a díckhead he is. May he leave this earth in intense physical and mental pain.

Hobbes wrote:

2. It allows Bush to redefine the geneva convention based on "his interpretation".

0_o Wtf?? I thought the Gen Con applies to all nations without interpretation. If this is not challenged in the supreme court all moralities are lost.

Hobbes wrote:

3. You can now be held for life without ever being charged of any crime or even seeing a court room.

This one speaks for itself. See my comment in point 1!

Hobbes wrote:

Ironically it also says that any kind of torture on US military of the same nature can be tried in the US.

Had to read this a couple of times. Is this by specific soldiers who have been tortured? Break out the 'lectricity and the balls pa!

Sure they poured oil down that soldiers throat in "Three Kings". Ha, sure we'll try that!

Akrasia

Nick_oliveri wrote:

Had to read this a couple of times. Is this by specific soldiers who have been tortured? Break out the 'lectricity and the balls pa!

Sure they poured oil down that soldiers throat in "Three Kings". Ha, sure we'll try that!

i think you missed the point there. 'Tried' in this case refers to trial, not 'attempted'
Basically, the new law means that America can torture anyone it wants, including other americans (once they've been stripped of their citizenship) But if anyone tries to torture an american anywhere in the world, they can be 'extraordinary renditioned' to Guantanamo bay where they can be held indefinately without trial or any right to Habeas Corpus.

it's an archetypal example of a totalitarian police state, applied to a globalised world

bonkey

Manic Moran wrote:

On the issue of citizenship, the US law on the matter has always been that the government can strip you of citizenship if you act in a manner that indicates that you have no intention of being a good American. If it means that you are left with no citizenship at all, sucks to be you.

I believe that the distinction is as follows:

Old Law: The government would try and convict you, and strip you of your citizenship as a result.

New Law: The government can make a claim, strip you of your citizenship, and then do what they like with you as you're no longer a US citizen.

In short, it does away with the need for trial.

I could, of course, be wrong in how I understand both the current and newly-proposed situations.

jc

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote:

Actually it doesn't. According to International laws it is legally impossible to be without a country.

US State Department appears to disagree with you.

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html

D. DUAL NATIONALITY / STATELESSNESS

Persons intending to renounce U.S. citizenship should be aware that, unless they already possess a foreign nationality, they may be rendered stateless and, thus, lack the protection of any government. They may also have difficulty traveling as they may not be entitled to a passport from any country.

Curiously, it is possible to be a US Non-Citizen-National: i.e. a National of the United States, but not a Citizen. Basically it involves American Samoa and Swains Island, wherever that is. Not sure if there is such a thing as American Samoan Citizenship or not.

In short, it does away with the need for trial.

I could, of course, be wrong in how I understand both the current and newly-proposed situations.

Current situation does not require a trial. For example, you could be outside of the US and thus unavailable (and unwilling) to step into a US courtroom, plus the US does not conduct trial in absentia. Looking again the State Dept website, the decision is made by Consular Officers. The criteria are very tight, but it is possible.

NTM

lostexpectation

I thought some of the black panthers were stateless, from the US/HAITI.

this bill is unbelievable, compromise, no its give even more power to Bush


arrrrrrrrghhhhhh, it just too much. how soon can it go to the supreme court, cna they act on it, in the mean time.

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote:

US State Department appears to disagree with you.

I also disagree on them about Torture too. Doesn't make it right.

Go read up the UN charter on stateless people. You will see just because you have been declared stateless you don't suddenly loose all your rights. If anything you still have the same rights as a US citizen.

For example according to the UN charter if you are stateless it automatically overrides the ban on Habeas Corpus that Bush is trying to push through. (article 16, chapter 2)

It also means that any detainees in Gitmo that have been declared stateless before going there are to be given the same laws as the USA or Cuba depending on who actually owns the land. US military owning it would declare it US soil.

Current situation does not require a trial.

Actually the SCJ a few months ago declared that unconstitutional which is why the new law is being steamrolled in. Also the new law stops anyone from brining your case to court. This means if you were locked up your family can't even petition the courts to have the case seen.

how soon can it go to the supreme court, cna they act on it,

A republican stacked SCJ, one can only hope they do the right thing.

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote:

Actually the SCJ a few months ago declared that unconstitutional which is why the new law is being steamrolled in.

I meant that removal of citizenship does not require a trial, never has.

I do not comment on the UN charter relevance for two reasons. (1) As near as I know, it's not law in the US, and (2) i've not read the bill in question yet, I'm not sure just what the supposed benefit is of removal of citizenship.

NTM

Memnoch

land of freedom, equality and all that other nonsense...

If only all criminals were allowed to declare themselves immune to prosecution wouldn't that be a much better world we live in.

I really hope that heaven and hell really do exist (even though I don't believe in them).

banaman

I don't see how we can argue the benefits of our democratic instituions when this bill wipes the most important ones out at a stroke.
We are supposed to be more civilised, less barbaric and our rules of fairness and equality are "universal".
This bill will make us (the Western Democracies) more enemies and leave us open to rightful claims of hypocrisy.
It will also make the world less safe for us all.
Bush and those who support him are a demonstrable threat to our peace and security. It's time we in the Western States did more to demonstrate this.
His stance on global warming & and the war on terror just prove that he is a threat to me. my kids and my grandchildren. Likewise ANYONE & EVERYONE who supports him.
I'm going to boycott each and every company that supports Bush and/or that arsehole Blair.

Tha Gopher

Manic Moran wrote:

On the issue of citizenship, the US law on the matter has always been that the government can strip you of citizenship if you act in a manner that indicates that you have no intention of being a good American. If it means that you are left with no citizenship at all, sucks to be you.

NTM

Yes, not sure if they can strip US born people of their citizenship, but plenty of deported Nazi war criminals were stripped of their aquired citizenship (and Im sure not all of these collaborators were welcomed back to their homelands with open arms and a fresh passport). Osama Bin Laden was stripped of his Saudi citizenship (whether the Sudanese or Afghans gave him one I dont know, the Sudanese want nothing to do with him now so presumably revoked it if they had, and if the Afghans gave it the government whixh granted t doesnt even exist any more, so I doubt he still has it. So in effect he is stateless)

Quite scary altogether

Manic Moran

Tha Gopher wrote:

Yes, not sure if they can strip US born people of their citizenship

Yes, they can. For example, it turned out most fortunate for me that I never acheived a rank higher than 3-Star in the FCA: Taking a position as a non-commissioned officer in a foreign military is sufficient grounds. There is a little discretion, however: Corporal in a friendly nation is a lot less likely to result in removal of citizenship compared to General of the North Korean Army.

NTM

Victor

How does this apply to American paramilitaries, e.g. CIA? As accused and victim?

PixelTrawler

Interesting read on the Military Commissions Act here
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15169.htm