<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Personally I find all this talk about "tyranny" to be little more than
The Supreme Court said that Congress needed to establish the rules for
treatment of terrorist suspects being detained by the United States,
and so Congress did. <br>
It was not tyranny when thousands of Japanese and Germans (yes, Germans
too) were interred during World War II. Was it illegal and misguided?
Arguably so. But not tyranny. Not a usurpation of the government. Not
an unconstitutional suspension of rights of American citizens (nothing
in the article originally referenced supports the notion that ordinary
Americans can be detained under this bill as far as I can tell). <br>
The right of Habeus Corpus, according to the Constitution, cannot be
suspended except in times of invasion or insurrection. We have seen
both of those things. Foreign terrorists attacking our shores on 9-11.
Americans going to join their cause in armed militancy supporting Al
Quaeda and the Taliban. I think there's a case to be made that the
conditions for the suspension of Habeus Corpus have been met. Others
may disagree, but it's hardly the case that it's an open-and-shut "no."
If the Bush administration were determined to overthrow the rule of
law, they would have started with the first Supreme Court ruling that
said the military tribunals as originally composed were illegal. <br>
Talk to me about true tyranny when George W. Bush is still in the White
House on January 21st, 2009. Until then, I see nothing more than a
possibly over-zealous (and only possibly so), but still
well-intentioned, attept to protect the United States from an enemy
which is determined to eradicate our way of life and in the process
stifle forever the Transhumanist dream, if only incidentally as a part
of its attempt to drag the world back to the 13th Century. <br>
The goal of the Islamists; a global Caliphate which places all of
humanity under strict Islamic law, is a scenario which must be avoided
at all costs.<br>
<pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</a>] On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 11:18:48PM +0200, Amara Graps wrote:
<pre wrap="">There should be massive demonstrations over this. Why isn't there?!
<pre wrap="">Those who don't care about impeaching a criminal don't care
about their country turned into a dictatorship...
My understanding is that it was congress that did this, not the executive
branch. I would interpret it as empty electioneering: the congressmonsters
do not want to appear soft on terrorism right before the election.
Legislative branch grandstanding is done all the time, but it is still
meaningless. What counts is if the supreme court upholds it. I predict
that the court will knock it down without a second thought.
Regarding massive demonstrations, we have congressional elections in a few
weeks. We will see what happens there.
extropy-chat mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a>