Purposeful Ramblings Through My Mind

You are incprrect. It did pass, and it does apply to anyone the President names as an "enemy combatant".

http://wyldraven.livejournal.com/234193.html

http://pecunium.livejournal.com/207154.html

From:

dagoski.livejournal.com

Damn! I thought I had time to write me reps. I guess we'll have to fall back on 2nd Ammendment now. Ironically, this is just what all the right wing militia guys were telling us in the 1990s when we lived under the tyranny of Clinton.

From:

OK, the habeas corpus thing does seem to apply to only non-citizens, but would include legal aliens in HR 6166. The definition in S 3930 is not clear on that point.

3) LAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- The term `lawful enemy combatant' means an individual who is--

`(A) a member of the regular forces of a State party engaged in hostilities against the United States;

`(B) a member of a militia, volunteer corps, or organized resistance movement belonging to a State party engaged in such hostilities, which are under responsible command, wear a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry their arms openly, and abide by the law of war; or

`(C) a member of a regular armed force who professes allegiance to a government engaged in such hostilities, but not recognized by the United States.

4) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means an individual engaged in hostilities against the United States who is not a lawful enemy combatant.

In addition there seem to be other differences in S 3930 and HR 6166 that will require conference.

From:

Where do they define "hostilities"?

From:

The bill itself does not seem to do so. Remember though, it "amends" existing law that may, or may not, do so.

Also Thomas (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.03930:) has been updated with this bit about S 3930:

Latest Major Action: 9/29/2006 Cleared for White House.

which indicates to me that the conference has already been held to work out the differences, and it will be signed into law in short order.

If you follow that link, you can read the entire text of S 3930.

From:

OK, no conference.

The House had already voted this week, 253-168, endorsing Bush's plan for military detainees. The Senate passed a nearly identical bill Thursday by a 65-34 vote. Rather than reconcile the technical differences between the two bills, the House voted 250-170 to send the Senate version to the president to sign.
Congress Sends Bush Terror Tribunal Bill (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/29/ap/politics/mainD8KEMQKG1.shtml)

From:

It seems to me you guys wouldn't have much trouble getting landed-immigrant status, if my knowledge of your educational status is correct. We'd certainly do whatever we could to help.

From:

dagoski.livejournal.com

With any luck, Dreampod 9 will be hiring game developers.

From:

What exactly is landed-immigrant status?

From:

It's the equivalent of a green card, I think. You're not a citizen, but you've been granted the right to live in Canada, work, do business, etc, and it's the precursor to applying for citizenship.

From:

redeem147.livejournal.com

I believe they've changed the name to permanent resident.

From:

No, I'm pretty sure there's a distinction between the two. You can be a landed immigrant without being a permanent resident. I think. I'll check with my dad, he's an immigration officer and would know.

From:

neosis.livejournal.com

Torture for everyone!

Personally, I think the only effective way to demonstrate that this is not acceptable is to waterboard every single member of congress and the senate. Then when they have real applicable knowledge of what they're condoning then ask them whether it's ok to do that to prisoners over and over again.

I'm not joking, it's time they got a taste of what they approve.

From:

It didn't work on McCain, who has been tortured (while a POW in Viet Nam) and still caved in to this insane bill.

From:

stress-kitten.livejournal.com

Frazer's urge to visit the U.S. (he's wanted to go vacation in Hawaii with me for a while now) just vanished.

Guess somewhere else gets our tourism dollars.

From:

Piet's still going to a conference there in November, but I'm seriously debating whether or not to go through the hassle of getting a passport, when the only place I can afford to visit is somewhere I don't want to go.

From:

I go to the US a lot myself, and live about a kilometre from the Detroit River. I've been considering boycotting the country altogether for years now (ever since Bush got into office, actually -- the smell of fascism came early for me). I think this decides it for me.

From:

Something you and Piet should both consider carefully. There is no doubt that non-resident persons who are not citizens have had all protections of the US court system removed by this abomination. I will be strongly recommending to all persons who are not US citizens that they stay away from this country until this has been overturned, if it is.

From:

Agreed, though it should be noted that most of the people who have already been affected by this (ie. before Hamdan) were shanghaied outside of the US.

Additionally, I am not confident that my current government would stand in the way of Bush were he to come looking for undesirables here, covertly or overtly. The previous, centrist government was bad enough about cooperating with Bush -- the current administration is significantly to the right.

From:

Though, it should be pointed out that we're in the categories least likely to be affected. We're WASPS who have never been involved in any protest more significant than signing a petition of two. According to that old poem, we'd be the last group they came for.

From:

There's a new version of Niemoller's famous poem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...).

First They Came for the Muslims (http://buffaloreport.com/021123rohde.html)

And I have family who've been arrested for anti-war protests. So I'm a bit higher up the list.

From:

"We're WASPS who have never been involved in any protest more significant than signing a petition of two."

Speak for yourself, my friend. I've been involved in quite a few major protests over the years. Tear gas, pepper spray, attack dogs, rubber bullets -- I've seen it all. Prior to 9/11, the various states' reactions were getting worse and worse with each new protest, culminating in a young protester shot dead in Genoa. Then 9/11 happened and the protesting stopped, more or less.

Also, more of a WAS than a WASP, but close enough :-)

From:

I was speaking for myself and Piet, not you. I wouldn't so presume. :)

From:

I've made my decision. (http://ghostwes.livejournal.com/30674.html)

From:

The Canadian government has already turned over one suspect, who spent 10 months in detention in the US, and was finally released due to no evidence. I blogged about it when the release happened a couple of months ago.

From:

Who was this?

From:

http://www.ararcommission.ca/eng/26.htm

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/09/every_suspect_i.html

Actually, Canada just pointed him out. He was taken at JFK.

From:

Yes, I am well aware of the Arar case, as most Canadians at this point probably are. The way you described the situation was quite a bit different from what is actually known to have happened. He was actually deported from the US to Syria (where he was born) as an "extraordinary rendition", where he was subsequently tortured and forced to admit to things he knew nothing about. I'm just surprised they let him out. Most people in his situation simply disappear.

From:

My apologies. I had only remembered that he was a Canadian, fingered by the RCMP, and that he ended up in our torture system. I did not intend to besmirch your nation, only to point out that it had been made an unwitting accomplice in one known case. I shot off my mouth when I was angry. Most sincere apologies.

From:

No need to apologise, sir. Besides, Canada does deserve at least some besmirching for its own part in handling of Maher Arar. The Prime Minister still has not apologised to him for what happened (though the RCMP head has done so -- day before yesterday, I believe).

Also, whether the US tortures someone, or sends the victim to a place where they know they will be tortured, it amounts to the same, morally, as far as I am concerned.

From:

Also, whether the US tortures someone, or sends the victim to a place where they know they will be tortured, it amounts to the same, morally, as far as I am concerned.

I agree entirely.

http://wyldraven.livejournal.com/234193.html
http://wyldraven.livejournal.com/234467.html
http://wyldraven.livejournal.com/234515.html

From:

althea_valara

WHAT?!?! *shocked*

I am so, so glad you are on my friends list. I admit I don't pay very much attention to the news, so I'm happy that there's other people who DO pay attention, and I can stay informed about the things I desperately need to know.

This is scary. Very very scary. I'm running off now to a forum where smart people (including at least one lawyer) post, so I can see what they say about this. And I will most definitely be writing to my congressmembers about this.

From:

althea_valara

Oh, and if things keep up like this, you just may have a new neighbor someday.

From:

You'd be welcome, and I'd help in any way I could.

From:

tormentedartist.livejournal.com

This is very scary. I'm passing this link along ok ?

From:

Absolutely. If I make something public, I'm always granting permission to link to it or quote it.

From:

perlandria.livejournal.com

IF my vote gets counted at all.

From: