Obama's Christmas Day Bomber Lie

[BeAChooser]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/11/AR2010021103331.html

Where the U.S. went wrong on the Christmas Day bomber

February 12, 2010

… snip …

It was entirely reasonable for the FBI to be contacted and for that agency to take him into custody. But contrary to what some in government have suggested, that Abdulmutallab was taken into custody by the FBI did not mean, legally or as a matter of policy, that he had to be treated as a criminal defendant at any point.

… snip …

Contrary to what the White House homeland security adviser and the attorney general have suggested, if not said outright, not only was there no authority or policy in place under the Bush administration requiring that all those detained in the United States be treated as criminal defendants, but relevant authority was and is the opposite. The Supreme Court held in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that "indefinite detention for the purpose of interrogation is not authorized" but also said in the same case that detention for the purpose of neutralizing an unlawful enemy combatant is permissible and that the only right of such a combatant -- even if he is a citizen, and Abdulmutallab is not -- is to challenge his classification as such a combatant in a habeas corpus proceeding. This does not include the right to remain silent or the right to a lawyer, but only such legal assistance as may be necessary to file a habeas corpus petition within a reasonable time. That was the basis for my ruling in Padilla v. Rumsfeld that, as a convenience to the court and not for any constitutionally based reason, he had to consult with a lawyer for the limited purpose of filing a habeas petition, but that interrogation need not stop.

 

[joobz]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/11/AR2010021103331.html

Well, if that article is true and represents the new america, than liberty is dying and the terrorists are getting their wish.

Wonderful.



Seriously, BAC, aren't you a little bit conerned about giving the government power to do what they want to ANYONE if they deem you an enemy combatant?
"and that the only right of such a combatant -- even if he is a citizen, and Abdulmutallab is not -- is to challenge his classification as such a combatant in a habeas corpus proceeding. This does not include the right to remain silent or the right to a lawyer,"

Remember, now, this is the same government you find so incompetent that they shouldn't be allowed to regulate business.


ETA: Why can I not find the "enemy combatant" exemption clause in the constitution or bill of rights?

 

[BeAChooser]

ETA: Why can I not find the "enemy combatant" exemption clause in the constitution or bill of rights?

LOL! There are lots of things you can't find in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights that the Obama administration and left insist are *really* there.

And when even that isn't enough to convince people, you can always try ramming it down their throats:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/us/politics/13obama.html "Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power"