The Military Commissions Act of 2006 was passed by the Senate over two weeks ago yet, Bush has not actually signed HR 6166 and it doesn't become law until his signature is on it.
The big question at the moment is why Bush has delayed signing the legislation HE ENDORSED even in the midst of fast-tracking other bills of little significance?
WHAT THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT OF 2006 "LEGISLATES"
- Doesn't suspend, as is accommodated for in the Constitution, but completely abolishes Habeas Corpus permanently - the right of the detainee to see the evidence against him and not be locked up for eternity based on the arbitrary will of the state.
- Contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006
2006-10-16 16:50:16 · 5 answers · asked by big-brother 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sounds like what we've come to expect of Bush. He probably won't sign it till after the November elections.
2006-10-16 16:55:18 · answer #1 · answered by beast 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
instantaneous consequences - Democrats will proceed to attempt and make the sheep believe that this act someway is against quite anybody. The sheep, being sheep, will believe it. long term outcomes - The sheep would be confident that the administration needs not something greater suitable than to regulate the rustic in some Orwellian fantasy international. This concern will permeate into mainstream usa, commencing the way for a whole Democrat revolution over the Republicans in 2008. shortly after, each Bush software, from Iraq to N. Korea, would be reversed. by utilising 2009 the U.S. would be attacked by utilising itself soil lower back, and Democrats will blame Bush.
2016-11-23 15:34:26 · answer #2 · answered by tenuta 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow sounds scary and big brother-ish... Hey aren't the conservatives the ones whom are (supposed to be) about LESS government control????? Looks like the party system has flipped a switch. So my disagreement with Bush would be considered "aiding the enemy" ...so much for the first amendment.
2006-10-16 16:56:55 · answer #3 · answered by Katie 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Its a terrible law that hopefully will be reversed in Congress in years to come or maybe, just maybe deemed unconstitutional by the USSC. What astonishes me is the total loyalty some people have to this administration or is it fear ?
2006-10-16 16:55:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what Dubya is thinking. My suspicion is he's delaying it because signing it will cause him to get impeached or indicted easier later. At least I hope so. His last day to sign is tomorrow before it is voided.
2006-10-16 16:55:47 · answer #5 · answered by notme 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋