From Democracy to Dictatorship: The Big Fix


Civil Liberties vs. Patriot Act and Martial Law

To read the posts on the other issues please use the links named after the different page-subtitles.

For additional information see also the section "New World Order" , "Empire Agenda" and "Take Action! -- Take Back America!" in the Main Navigation
__________________

News & Comments

__________________

Important Reports

__________________

Election Fraud

_______________
Civil Liberties vs. Patriot Act and Martial Law

VIDEO Keith Olbermann & Constitutional Law Prof Jonathan Turley On Military Commissions Act

The Erosion Of Democracy And Freedom In America - The Military Commissions Act of 2006

FEMA Concentration Camps: Locations and Executive Orders

U.S. Concentration Camps: FEMA And The REX 84 Program

Breathtaking Power Grab

NSA: Free Speech is a Weapon of Mass Destruction

Total Information Awareness and the Neocon Stasi State

CIFA: Pentagons COINTELPRO

POLICE STATE! Coming Or Already Here?

OPERATION GARDEN PLOT -- U.S. Military Civil Disturbance Planning: The War At Home

The Avian Flu Fright is Politically Timed

Martial Law And The Advent Of The Supreme Executive

The Police State Is Closer Than You Think

The Camps of ICE, Americas Road to Fascist Rule Nears Completion as US Government Accelerates Building of Concentration Camps

Pentagon Devising Scenarios For Martial Law In US

Master Plan

Nazification of Germany vs. Nazification of America

Patriot Act or German Enabling Act? The Decrees of 1933

Everthing You Need To Know About How The USA Patriot Act...

Is America Preparing for Martial Law?

_______________
Related Links

Military Dictatorship USA?

The Nazification Of America


Related Links

The National Security Strategy of the United States of America September 2002

DoD Issuances & OSD Administrative Instructions

Government Accountability Office

Black Box Voting

PROJECT CENSORED

uhuh.com -- Exposing Corruption at the Federal Level

Very Pissed Off Combat Veterans -- And Blueprints For Change By John McCarthy

From Democracy to Dictatorship

- Civil Liberties vs. Patriot Act & Martial Law -

Home | John McCarthy | CIA | Treason in Wartime | 1941-2001 | Science vs Religion | Reality Or Hoax? | Israel & ME | 9/11 - 3/11 - 7/7 -- Cui Bono? | New World Order | Lies vs Facts | War on Terror - Terrorism of War | Patriotism vs Humanity | War Crimes - Committed 'In All Our Names' | Enviroment & Lobbyism | FOIA & Whistleblowers vs Cover-Ups | Recruiting Lies vs Military Reality | From Democracy to Dictatorship | Empire Agenda | Media Coverage | International (War)Crimes Tribunals | Take Action! - Take Back America! | Summaries & Previews | Index Part 1 | Index Part 2 | Multimedia Index

2 VIDEOS
Keith Olbermann & Constitutional Law Prof Jonathan Turley
On Military Commissions Act

video 1 autostarts, scroll down for video 2 

sroll down for video 2 and cklick play to start


and now the same in writing:

Keith Olbermann & Constitutional Law Prof Jonathan Turley
On Military Commissions Act


MSNBC
10-18-6

To assess what this law will truly mean for us all, I'm joined by Jonathan Turley, professor of constitutional law at George Washington University.

As always, sir, great thanks for your time.

JONATHAN TURLEY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR: Thanks, Keith.

OLBERMANN: I want to start by asking you about a specific part of this act that lists one of the definitions of an unlawful enemy combatant as, quote, "a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a combatant status review tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense."

Does that not basically mean that if Mr. Bush or Mr. Rumsfeld say so, anybody in this country, citizen or not, innocent or not, can end up being an unlawful enemy combatant?

TURLEY: It certainly does. In fact, later on, it says that if you even give material support to an organization that the president deems connected to one of these groups, you too can be an enemy combatant.

And the fact that he appoints this tribunal is meaningless. You know, standing behind him at the signing ceremony was his attorney general, who signed a memo that said that you could torture people, that you could do harm to them to the point of organ failure or death.

So if he appoints someone like that to be attorney general, you can imagine who he's going be putting on this board.

OLBERMANN: Does this mean that under this law, ultimately the only thing keeping you, I, or the viewer out of Gitmo is the sanity and honesty of the president of the United States?

TURLEY: It does. And it's a huge sea change for our democracy. The framers created a system where we did not have to rely on the good graces or good mood of the president. In fact, Madison said that he created a system essentially to be run by devils, where they could not do harm, because we didn't rely on their good motivations.

Now we must. And people have no idea how significant this is. What, really, a time of shame this is for the American system. What the Congress did and what the president signed today essentially revokes over 200 years of American principles and values.

It couldn't be more significant. And the strange thing is, we've become sort of constitutional couch potatoes. I mean, the Congress just gave the president despotic powers, and you could hear the yawn across the country as people turned to, you know, "Dancing with the Stars." I mean, it's otherworldly.

OLBERMANN: Is there one defense against this, the legal challenges against particularly the suspension or elimination of habeas corpus from the equation? And where do they stand, and how likely are they to overturn this action today?

TURLEY: Well, you know what? I think people are fooling themselves if they believe that the courts will once again stop this president from taking over-taking almost absolute power. It basically comes down to a single vote on the Supreme Court, Justice Kennedy. And he indicated that if Congress gave the president these types of powers, that he might go along.

And so we may have, in this country, some type of ueber-president, some absolute ruler, and it'll be up to him who gets put away as an enemy combatant, held without trial.

It's something that no one thought-certainly I didn't think-was possible in the United States. And I am not too sure how we got to this point. But people clearly don't realize what a fundamental change it is about who we are as a country. What happened today changed us. And I'm not too sure we're going to change back anytime soon.

OLBERMANN: And if Justice Kennedy tries to change us back, we can always call him an enemy combatant.

The president reiterated today the United States does not torture. Does this law actually guarantee anything like that?

TURLEY: That's actually when I turned off my TV set, because I couldn't believe it. You know, the United States has engaged in torture. And the whole world community has denounced the views of this administration, its early views that the president could order torture, could cause injury up to organ failure or death.

The administration has already established that it has engaged in things like waterboarding, which is not just torture. We prosecuted people after World War II for waterboarding prisoners. We treated it as a war crime. And my God, what a change of fate, where we are now embracing the very thing that we once prosecuted people for.

Who are we now? I know who we were then. But when the president said that we don't torture, that was, frankly, when I had to turn off my TV set.

OLBERMANN: That same individual fell back on the same argument that he'd used about the war in Iraq to sanction this law. Let me play what he said and then ask you a question about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Yet with the distance of history, the questions will be narrowed and few. Did this generation of Americans take the threat seriously? And did we do what it takes to defeat that threat?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OLBERMANN: Does he understand the irony of those words when taken out of the context of this particular passage or of what he perceives as the war against terror, and that, in fact, the threat we may be facing is the threat of President George W. Bush?

TURLEY: Well, this is going to go down in history as one of our greatest self-inflicted wounds. And I think you can feel the judgment of history. It won't be kind to President Bush.

But frankly, I don't think that it will be kind to the rest of us. I think that history will ask, Where were you? What did you do when this thing was signed into law? There were people that protested the Japanese concentration camps, there were people that protested these other acts. But we are strangely silent in this national yawn as our rights evaporate.

OLBERMANN: Well, not to pat ourselves on the back too much, but I think we've done a little bit of what we could have done, and...

TURLEY: That's true.

OLBERMANN: ... I'll see you at Gitmo. Jonathan Turley, constitutional law professor at George Washington University. As always, greatest thanks for your time, Jon.

TURLEY: Thanks, Keith.


Sources:
www.crooksandliars.com
www.rense.com

Check for latest Site-Updates

Index of Posted Articles

or copy and paste the URL into Google Translate

Important note:

We neither promote nor condone hate speech in any way, shape or form. We have created this website to search for truthful facts that can shape unconventional conclusions and restore historical integrity. The work is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution as well as by Article 19 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles posted on this website are distributed for their included information without profit for research and/or educational purposes only. This website has no affiliation whatsoever with the original sources of the articles nor are we sponsored or endorsed by any of the original sources.

 
Copyright John McCarthy 2005 if not indicated otherwise

 
Ages ago, I taught my children "never to point with a naked finger towards dressed people" and I usually keep that for myself as well but for this website I have to quote:
"The Emporer Has NO Clothes On!"
Traude
 

 
Want to get in touch? You can send email at:
 

or

Disclaimer And Fair Use