any ideas about military commissions act signed by Bush?

Question

Bush recently signed the Military Commissions act of 2006. What so you think will be the immediate results, and what do you think could be the repercussions of theis act further down the road?

Answer 1

The idea that you can now be plucked off the street at the whim of the government and have your basic human rights suspended is horrific.

It is reprehensible to think that people would be willing to sacrifice the freedoms and human rights of others so they can feel less disturbed by a threat that is more unlikely than being hit by a car on the way to work. These actions are only taken happily when people maintain the "it doesn't apply to me" attitude.

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security" - Benjamin Franklin
********

For those in doubt as to the effects of this legislation:

Article 11 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

"Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence."

When the Military Commissions Act includes:

Based on his findings, the judge may introduce hearsay evidence [10 U.S.C. sec. 949a(b)(2)(E)(i)], evidence obtained without a search warrant [10 U.S.C. sec. 949a(b)(2)(B)], evidence obtained when the degree of coercion is disputed [10 U.S.C. sec. 948r(d)], or classified evidence not made available to the defense [10 U.S.C. sec. 949d(f)(2)(B)]

Answer 2

Democrats and Republicans are the same. Behind close doors Dems and Reps are always in agreement. To the rest of the world, they act like they are against each other. This creates the illusion there are two sides of ever issue. In reality, they are the same thing. The Central Government, run by bureaucratic servants called Democrats and Republicans, know that there is a 11% approval rate of the government by the US citizens. This is unacceptable to the Dems and Reps. They need away to show there power. So creating a fear atmosphere, will get the citizens attention. This will also let them portray they are doing something for the citizens that cannot be done without the government. I't is a forced recognition of power in all its tyranny. One of the rules of war when facing a stronger enemy is to divide and conquer, rather then to attack your enemies force as a whole. Knowing that citizens and there constitutional freedoms/rights are a thee governments greatest enemy, creating a diversionary tactic such as Republican and Democrat would divide the governments enemies "citizens + constitutional freedoms/rights" Once divided, the enemy is far easier to conquer. In this case, when we are divided, the Central Government can take away freedoms/rights, and implement tyrannous laws a lot easier than if we were united. Vote for ANYONE else besides Democrats or Republicans. I't can be anyone ranging from a third party candidate to Mickey Mouse. Just don't vote for Democrats or Republicans. They were bought and paid for a long time ago by bureaucrats. When Dems or Reps are elected, they serve the interests of transnational corporations that paid for them to get elected, not the citizens. I't is the greatest acting out of a "good cop bad cop" scenario in history. Just remember; Ron Paul and The Tea Party are the Republican Party. "I'f your a multi-billion dollar transnational corporation and you pay for, 1 President + 435 Congressmen + 100 Senators + 9 Supreme Court Justices, then you have total power over 350,000,000+ citizens and all there resources." I'f you don't agree with any of this, you believe exactly what they wan't you to believe.

Answer 3

Immediate results - Democrats will continue to try and make the sheep believe that this act somehow is against all people. The sheep, being sheep, will believe it.

Long term effects - The sheep will be convinced that the administration wants nothing more than to control the nation in some Orwellian fantasy world. This fear will permeate into mainstream America, opening the way for a complete Democrat revolution over the Republicans in 2008. Shortly after, every Bush program, from Iraq to N. Korea, will be reversed. By 2009 the U.S. will be attacked on its own soil again, and Democrats will blame Bush.

Answer 4

well the repercussions are quite clear if the govt doesn't like you it can declare you an enemy combatant and you will not have the power to appeal as you have no writ of hadaes corpus the essential right to petition the courts to right the wrongs against you. I think this clinches the debate as to whether those who support such laws are traitors to the constitution or not with a verdict of GUILTY AS HELL!!!

Answer 5

Read Article #5 of the Geneva Convention .

The US has always followed the GC but it was never defined in US law .
Now it's defined and rights of appeal are included, all the way to the Supreme Court .

The main ojection to this , is that civilian lawyers don't get paid by the taxpayer and can't drag things out for years in court .

That's a lot of money , not going to lawyers .

Answer 6

We were already on the road to a dictatorship, this puts the process in gear.


Go to
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.6166.EH:

And read it. Anybody but a total idiot who reads it all the way through will know what a monstrosity it is.

Answer 7

-No repercussions...
-detainees are unlawful combatants that can be held until a military tribunal determines their fate....
- they fight/kill/ for no country therefore they have no country to go back to. Their fate is determined by the people who captured rather than killed them...
-there will likely be whines/protests by human rights groups but so what?

Answer 8

It opens the way for OUR servicemen (and women) to be tortured in return somewhere down the road!

Answer 9

Nothing good that is for sure. He signed that act without his parties baCKING OR ANY BACKING CAUSE HE IS NOW A DICTATOR.

Answer 10

uh oh you hear that? that's the FBI at your door
see ya!