According to the Attorney General, you have no rights.

[theweaselking]

Watch on YouTube

US Attorney General insists that nowhere in the Constitution of the United States are people ever granted the right of habeas corpus.

I mean, it's CERTAINLY not in the Fifth Amendment, which explains that you are never to "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law", or the Sixth, which says that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense."[1]

So, read that again: The ATTORNEY GENERAL has just stated, outright, that the fifth and sixth amendments DO NOT APPLY TO AMERICANS, in his opinion, and that you have *no* right to a trial, or to a defense, or to know why you've been imprisoned, and not even a right to *only be imprisoned for a provable reason*.

He's just openly declared that he thinks it's legal for the USA to "disappear" citizens.

You *do* remember that Halliburton was contracted billions of dollars last year to build konzentrationslager on US soil, right?

How's that water, hmm? Still as cold as it was when you got in? Are you sure? Those are definitely little bubbles forming all around you. What's that white misty stuff streaming up over your head?


[1]: And let's leave alone Article I, Section 9 of the core document, shall we?

Comments

[jrolsma.livejournal.com]

This offends me to the depths of my soul. I cannot possibly express to you the feeling of helplessness this group of tyrants gives me but I can tell you that I am as vocal as I can be about it. Unfortunately, not many people listen to the rantings of a minor member of the country.

Time to make those emigration plans for when my daughter graduates from high school. Is it wrong to start counting down at 10 years to go?

[fortysevenbteg.livejournal.com]

I notice Alberto has that patented Bush Smirk™ down pretty good.

[matgb]

Tinfoil hat might not actually be needed in this case, I think this one might actually be true.

Still, fortunately thee and me don't live there.

[zibacco.livejournal.com]

Ignorance at that level is beyond astounding. In fact, habeas corpus is the only right specifically mentioned in the main body of the Constitution. The rest were added as amendments.

Article I, Section 9: "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Even then it falls under "Limits on Congress", which would seem to imply that the Legislature, not the Executive, has the power to suspend in the case of invasion or rebellion.

[larabeaton.livejournal.com]

I think that you are being rather generous at stating that this is "ignorance". I read this as more "we know we're doing something flagrantly illegal, and we're trying to weasel out of it".

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

Why would I need a tinfoil hat or a "might be"? That's the Alberto Gonzales and Arlen Specter, and he says, right out, that Americans don't have a right to habeas corpus just because the Constitution prohibits taking away the right to habeas corpus.

#1: There's no tin foil hattery involved.
#2: A tangent - "OMG A CONSPIRACY THEORY" in no way dismisses the need to answer the questions raised in a perfectly reasonable request, dammit.

[goblinpaladin.livejournal.com]

Advance Australia Fair.

[Mind, we don't even have a Bill of Rights, so I shouldn't gloat too loud. We also don't really care if our citizens are caught up in your witch terrorist-hunt.

Y'know what? Nevermind. Screw Australia Fair.]

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

Why are you so mean to weasels?

[larabeaton.livejournal.com]

That was speciesist of me, wasn't it. My heartfelt apologies to you and yur people, your majesty.

[texas-tiger.livejournal.com]

More like "we know we're doing something flagrantly illegal and we don't give a shit".

[fortysevenbteg.livejournal.com]

I'm not well versed in the details of all this (a fact I'm not proud of, but I do try to learn when I can), but for Alberto's statement to be true, wouldn't that imply that we've never officially been granted that right, and that all these years it's been invoked and granted only because other people interpreted it just as Specter did?

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

Yes. Gonzales is saying that while they can't take the right away from you except in time of rebellion or invasion, there's nothing saying under what circumstances you're granted the right in the first place.

Meaning that they can't take it away from you legally, but they argue that *you never had it*, so they're not taking anything away by denying it to you.

[zenten.livejournal.com]

I have to wonder though, if nothing actually goes to a real trial, what can be done about it? (besides arresting those involved for kidnapping and assault of course)

[fortysevenbteg.livejournal.com]

That's indeed some creepy shark-skinned shit, sir.

[larabeaton.livejournal.com]

a) the Constitution guarantees the inalienable right to liberty
b) it also states that no person can take away your liberty without due legal process.
c) it guarantees the right to a speedy trial.
d) A writ of habeas corpus is a court order addressed to a prison official (or other custodian) ordering that a prisoner be brought before the court for determination of whether that person is serving a lawful sentence and/or whether he or she should be released from custody. It goes back to the Magna Carta, as far as human rights ae concerned.


The fact that the Attorney General is saying that you are not guaranteed the right to challenge the legality of your imprisonment is a violation of liberty without due process. he is, effectively, stating that you, and everyone else within the boundary of the US, and territories it controls can be held indefinitely without trial and without charge.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

I don't think you've got 10 years.

Do you own a gun?

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

It depends.

The system relies on at least *some* of the people not being Good Germans. The question of what you can do about it depends entirely on how many and who - whether you've got a legislative solution, or only a rebellious one.

[zenten.livejournal.com]

But doesn't that depend on who we're talking about in the system? Right now there would need to be enough support in the house to bypass a veto, which I'm not confident there is. But I'm pretty sure if somehow the people being held illegally did get the ability to have an appeal that could go up to the supreme court they would go free.

[zibacco.livejournal.com]

YOu know, you're right. I stand corrected. They do know they're breaking the law.

[jrolsma.livejournal.com]

Not one of my own. The bf has one and I will be learning to hunt this year. I start shooting lessons in February.

I'm not taking any chances.

[jrolsma.livejournal.com]

There are a few cases currently pending for the Guantanamo detainees. I believe that one of them may be in the queue for the Supreme court but I'll need to verify that. In theory, if it makes it to the Supreme Court, it can be overturned and the law declared unconstitutional. With the right-wing fascist packing of the court we currently have, there is no guarantee that the appropriate decision will be made. We have 30 years of fallout from this presidency to contend with now.

Also, the other way to deal with this is to repeal the Military Commission Act. There are a few senators making noise about this and a couple of lobby groups pushing for it. I believe that is where most of the hope for fixing this lies.

Until we can take the money out of the election cycle, we will continue to get this kind of crappy representation. Plus, too many people here are fat, dumb and lazy and refuse (not just don't have the opportunity, but actively refuse) to educate themselves on the issues.

[furtim.livejournal.com]

Remember all those arguments the Founders had over whether to enumerate rights in the Constitution because some were concerned that they might miss some? Both sides of that argument are tearing the fuck out of their coffins right now, because apparently all of that hand wringing is completely irrelevant; after all, what's the point of enumerating rights when somebody can just come along and blatantly ignore them?

[eididdy.livejournal.com]

I like how he caught himself (and was cut off by Specter) right as he said "suspended." In order for something to be suspended, it has to be in effect. You can't suspend my Canadian citizenship because I don't hold Canadian citizenship. You can suspend my driver's license because I have a driver's license to suspend.

[matgb]

John? This is me agreeing with you.

The concentration camps thing may be a little nutty, but I can't see any legitimate use for them, hence I think this one might actually be true.

Anyway, 1.30am, me sleep now...

[anivair.livejournal.com]

Note that, according to gonzales, you also do not have the right to bear arms. It just says that nobody could take that right away if you had it, but it doesn't give it to you.

I wonder if the constitution grants him immunity from a nuttkick?