[Anyone] Habeas Corpus RIP 1215-2006

[Thos Myers]

Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006)
By Molly Ivins
Truthdig

Wednesday 27 September 2006

With a smug stroke of his pen, President Bush is set to wipe out a
safeguard against illegal imprisonment that has endured as a cornerstone
of legal justice since the Magna Carta.




Austin, Texas - Oh dear. I'm sure he didn't mean it. In Illinois' Sixth
Congressional District, long represented by Henry Hyde, Republican
candidate Peter Roskam accused his Democratic opponent, Tammy Duckworth,
of planning to "cut and run" on Iraq.

Duckworth is a former Army major and chopper pilot who lost both legs in
Iraq after her helicopter got hit by an RPG. "I just could not believe he
would say that to me," said Duckworth, who walks on artificial legs and
uses a cane. Every election cycle produces some wincers, but how do you
apologize for that one?

The legislative equivalent of that remark is the detainee bill now being
passed by Congress. Beloveds, this is so much worse than even that
pathetic deal reached last Thursday between the White House and Republican
Sens. John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham. The White House has
since reinserted a number of "technical fixes" that were the point of the
putative "compromise." It leaves the president with the power to decide
who is an enemy combatant.

This bill is not a national security issue-this is about torturing
helpless human beings without any proof they are our enemies. Perhaps this
could be considered if we knew the administration would use the power with
enormous care and thoughtfulness. But of the over 700 prisoners sent to
Gitmo, only 10 have ever been formally charged with anything. Among other
things, this bill is a CYA for torture of the innocent that has already
taken place.

Death by torture by Americans was first reported in 2003 in a New York
Times article by Carlotta Gall. The military had announced the prisoner
died of a heart attack, but when Gall saw the death certificate, written
in English and issued by the military, it said the cause of death was
homicide. The "heart attack" came after he had been beaten so often on
this legs that they had "basically been pulpified," according to the
coroner.

The story of why and how it took the Times so long to print this
information is in the current edition of the Columbia Journalism Review.
The press in general has been late and slow in reporting torture, so very
few Americans have any idea how far it has spread. As is often true in
hierarchical, top-down institutions, the orders get passed on in what I
call the downward communications exaggeration spiral.

For example, on a newspaper, a top editor may remark casually, "Let's give
the new mayor a chance to see what he can do before we start attacking
him."

This gets passed on as "Don't touch the mayor unless he really screws up."

And it ultimately arrives at the reporter level as "We can't say anything
negative about the mayor."

The version of the detainee bill now in the Senate not only undoes much of
the McCain-Warner-Graham work, but it is actually much worse than the
administration's first proposal. In one change, the original compromise
language said a suspect had the right to "examine and respond to" all
evidence used against him. The three senators said the clause was
necessary to avoid secret trials. The bill has now dropped the word
"examine" and left only "respond to."

In another change, a clause said that evidence obtained outside the United
States could be admitted in court even if it had been gathered without a
search warrant. But the bill now drops the words "outside the United
States," which means prosecutors can ignore American legal standards on
warrants.

The bill also expands the definition of an unlawful enemy combatant to
cover anyone who has "has purposefully and materially supported
hostilities against the United States." Quick, define "purposefully and
materially." One person has already been charged with aiding terrorists
because he sold a satellite TV package that includes the Hezbollah
network.

The bill simply removes a suspect's right to challenge his detention in
court. This is a rule of law that goes back to the Magna Carta in 1215.
That pretty much leaves the barn door open.

As Vladimir Bukovsky, the Soviet dissident, wrote, an intelligence service
free to torture soon "degenerates into a playground for sadists." But not
unbridled sadism-you will be relieved that the compromise took out the
words permitting interrogation involving "severe pain" and substituted
"serious pain," which is defined as "bodily injury that involves extreme
physical pain."

In July 2003, George Bush said in a speech: "The United States is
committed to worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this
fight by example. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. Yet
torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes, whose
cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit."

Fellow citizens, this bill throws out legal and moral restraints as the
president deems it necessary-these are fundamental principles of basic
decency, as well as law.

I'd like those supporting this evil bill to spare me one affliction: Do
not, please, pretend to be shocked by the consequences of this
legislation. And do not pretend to be shocked when the world begins
comparing us to the Nazis.

"All we are saying is give peace a chance."
www.taosdailyweekly.com
Read the Weekly daily.