Scared.

[velvetpage]

The American government has voted to do away with the central human right, the one that makes possible the defense of all the others - the right to know why one is being locked up, and to have the public know it, too. This was the issue that was the catalyst for the French Revolution.

I have no say in this whatsoever - not even a vote, since I'm not American. Some of you do. So, a link: a list of the names of those in the government who voted for it. Vote them out of office, one and all. Vote in people who will repeal this law. If you really believe in liberty, do this. The rest of the world is watching to see which Americans can still claim any measure of morality at all.

http://pecunium.livejournal.com/206646.html

Comments

[wyldraven.livejournal.com]

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.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Where do they define "hostilities"?

[wyldraven.livejournal.com]

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.

[wyldraven.livejournal.com]

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)