Friday, September 29, 2006

S. 3930

Democrats are upset. The radical Leftists are upset. The ACLU is upset. Russ Feingold is upset.

Even Herb Kohl expressed his distress! SHOCKING!!!

What's the problem?

Terrorists' rights.


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate on Thursday endorsed President Bush's plans to prosecute and interrogate terror suspects, all but sealing congressional approval for legislation that Republicans intend to use on the campaign trail to assert their toughness on terrorism.

The 65-34 vote means the bill could reach the president's desk by week's end. The House passed nearly identical legislation on Wednesday and was expected to approve the Senate bill on Friday, sending it on to the White House.

"The Senate sent a strong signal to the terrorists that we will continue using every element of national power to pursue our enemies and to prevent attacks on America," Bush said in a statement Thursday night.

...The White House and its supporters have called the measure crucial in the anti-terror fight, but some Democrats said it left the door open to abuse, violating the Constitution in the name of protecting Americans.

Twelve Democrats sided with 53 Republicans in voting for the bill. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., in a tough re-election fight, joined 32 Democrats and the chamber's lone independent in opposing the bill. Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, was absent.


Read the roll call vote here. There realy aren't any surprises.

There's a lot of hand wringing on the Left.

Carl Levin said, "The habeas corpus language in this bill is as legally abusive of rights guaranteed in the Constitution as the actions at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and secret prisons that were physically abusive of detainees."


Referring to the upcoming elections, Teddy Kennedy said, "In 40 days, we can put an end to this nonsense."

Nancy Pelosi was angry.

In a statement yesterday, Speaker Dennis Hastert said, "Democrat Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and 159 of her Democrat colleagues voted today in favor of more rights for terrorists. So the same terrorists who plan to harm innocent Americans and their freedom worldwide would be coddled, if we followed the Democrat plan."

With eyebrows arched, Nancy Pelosi shot back, "I think the speaker is a desperate man for him to say that. Would you think that anyone in our country wants to coddle terrorists?"


I find it stunning that so many people in our country do want to coddle terrorists.

They don't understand that we are at war.

The 9/11 attacks were absolutely horrific; yet five short years later, the Dems (and Lincoln Chafee) focus on protecting terrorists rather than Americans.

The Dems want to present themselves as capable of fighting the War on Terror. They want the American people to trust them. They want us to trust them with our lives.

I don't trust them.

There will be legal challenges to S. 3930. I'm sure Ramsey Clark and his like-minded comrades will find time to argue against the legislation.

They'll probably find activist judges to rule in favor of our enemies.

Who knows what will remain of the legislation after they get done with it?

I take comfort in the fact that the Bush administration is doing everything within the law to prevent another 9/11.

For that to continue, it's critical that Republicans hold on to the House and the Senate.

_______________________________

Read R. Jeffrey Smith's analysis of S. 3930 in The Washington Post.

He frets about terrorist suspects not being given the full rights that the U.S. legal system provides for its citizens.

Another lib considers Bush to be a greater enemy to this country than the Islamic extremists, like Abu Hamza al-Muhajir (also known as Abu Ayyub al-Masri).

He's the new leader of al Qaeda in Iraq.

AP reports that in an audio message posted on a website yesterday, the leader is rallying the troops.


In addition to recruiting the speaker also called for explosives experts and nuclear scientists to join his group's holy war against the West.

"The field of jihad (holy war) can satisfy your scientific ambitions, and the large American bases (in Iraq) are good places to test your unconventional weapons, whether biological or dirty, as they call them," said the speaker.


And the Dems are worried about terrorists' rights?

Riiiiiiight.

5 comments:

Kate said...

These "people" are seriously starting to PISS ME OFF! I'm a lady, but I gotta tell ya, there are a few choice words and an action or two I would have NO problem dishing out.

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

He frets about terrorist suspects not being given the full rights that the U.S. legal system provides for its citizens.

I'm a bit pressed, so this is a cut-and-paste of my comment on Old Soldier's blog:

I think regardless of citizenship status, many of those on the Left always tend to side with the criminal rights over the victim rights. It is because they are bogged down with handwringing over making any kind of decision or moral judgment, for fear that they have mistakenly condemned an innocent. I don't think they really contemplate the reality of just how barbaric and evil people are, who sit behind bars, be they al-Qaeda detainees at Guantanamo, or gangbangers in San Quentin. What they agonize over, is the possibility that someone might have been wrongfully sentenced; and it paralyzes them into moral inaction and layers upon layers of giving the criminal every conceivable benefit of the doubt, beyond logical reasoning. And if bleeding-heart leftists can find just one example out of a million, where someone was wrongfully imprisoned, or someone's civil rights are finally violated because of the Patriot Act, they will ignore the 99.999% of the time where the system has worked, and handwring and agonize over the .001% of the time where society was wrong and unjust.

Law enforcement officers can sometimes have a bad apple who might abuse his privelege of carrying a sidearm; yet we don't "freak out" and overreact, calling for the ban of all police officers to be disallowed of the use and carry of firearms.

Mary said...

Simply put, the hand wringing could get us killed.

They don't get that.

I'm not advocating torture, but political correctness and waging war don't work well together.

I think it all gets down to the fact that this country is STILL not on a war footing.

I'm with you, Kate.

And WS, you make a great point:

... if bleeding-heart leftists can find just one example out of a million, where someone was wrongfully imprisoned, or someone's civil rights are finally violated because of the Patriot Act, they will ignore the 99.999% of the time where the system has worked, and handwring and agonize over the .001% of the time where society was wrong and unjust.

That's exactly right. It's crazy.

thedr9wningman said...

Leftists don't have a problem with morality. They're quite moral, in fact. What they have a problem with is opaque government. The Left believe that the People ARE the government. And when the government sets itself aside as a separate entity, the Left gets agitated.

The Right is mostly concerned about fear, danger, security; they let that lead them to poor decisions that have radical, unforeseen ramifications.

What is the result of the loss of Habeas Corpus? What is the result of being deemed an 'anti-patriot' by someone and then being put in prison without a lawyer. It means that ordinary citizens can be singled out by the government and 'put away'. I seem to remember some European country doing similar behavior a while ago... does anyone remember that?

The Left isn't worried about the terrorists' rights, they're worried about their own rights: your rights and mine! In the past, the ugliest parts of our history have been when our nation creates an Us Vs. Them mentality. In the past, it was Black Americans, or Jews, or Irish Catholics... pick your group. Now it is Islamic Americans who can be mistaken as terrorists. Yesterday, it was the Communists, today it is the Terrorists. This 1984ism will never end: there will always be some 'them'. It is our job as just Americans, and as a generally Christian nation, to give even our enemies a fair playing field, their own rights, so that we can actually prove their guilt, rather than using the witch-trial method of if they sink, they're innocent, and if they're guilty, they're a witch and they need to be killed.

Communist=witch=ni**er=terrorist=bad-guy-of-the-era. "We have always been at war with Oceania." -1984
"Oceania has no capital, and its titular head is a person whose whereabouts nobody knows." —pg 172
Does that sound familiar, too? *cough* bin Laden *cough*

When it comes down to it, the current administration doesn't have a very good record for sniffing out terrorists. The 9/11 attackers were in the country legally. No one put two and two together when they paid for flying lessons and weren't interested in landing.

The Left is worried about your rights. Screw the terrorists' rights, that's not the issue. The Left doesn't want the current witch-hunt to turn on our own nation in the future.

What if the tables turn, and the Left is in power? What if the Left were to denounce your values and throw you in jail, without a lawyer, for as long as they wanted to? What grounds? Pick one... some disagreement between you and them. Maybe they call you an alcoholic (because if you're in denial, then you're an alcoholic, and if you don't deny it... you are a...? That's right! Alcoholic!), and decide that alcoholics are the scourge of America. Maybe they attack people with guns, thinking that they're a danger to society. Whatever it is, look at how things may be if the tables were turned. If you're put in jail without due process, your rights AS A CITIZEN are in jeopardy. And if you're overseas (I know, lots of people are scared to travel, but it really is nice to get a new perspective), and you do not have Habeas Corpus rights in that country (it has, essentially, been a written code, internionally), that country can unfairly throw you in prison. If I were in a Turkish prison for no reason, that would look pretty bad for the Turks. Well, if we throw 'suspected' and uncharged 'terrorists' in prison (note: lots in Guantanamo had no terrorist ties) without any recourse, how does that make us look? It makes us look bad. It makes us look like international bullies. And what are the people of the Middle East fighting? International bullying. Do you see how this cycle feeds itself? The worse we act, the worse that makes us look, the more we have to fight!

Leftist have plenty of morals, stop with that nonsense story. Just because they aren't your particular beliefs doesn't mean they're lacking.

What really gets us killed, folks, is putting our nose where it doesn't belong. It doesn't belong in the Middle East, and people will always fight us as long as we are there. They're not as well organised as our government would like us to believe. Look at it this way: If the Chinese felt like taking over our country because, well, we owe them a lot of money, would you fight? Or would you speak Chinese and start eating Mu-shu? This is how the Middle East feels. The US represents a Christian, Western threat of 'immoral heathens' (sounds much like the Right's view of the Left) who is taking over the region for their own monetary and resource gain. Those people feel like we would if the Chinese were trying to take our country over. Resistance is patriotic, and it is how they cling to their values and lifestyle... which is what we're threatening. It is their duty to fight against us, and their religion strengthens that resolve. The only way to break the cycle is to get out of the region and mind our own business.

I'm allergic to dust mites. I will NEVER be able to kill every dust mite. And just like when the sailors cut starfish in half, for every innocent citizen you kill, you create more angry citizens, thereby making the terrorism problem worse. You will never be able to kill all terrorists. You have to find a better way (plus, isn't that genocide if you do?).

There's a difference between weakness and compassion. I believe the Bible sort of addresses that, doesn't it?

Think it through, people. See the endless cycle... this very cycle that Jesus tried to break... and put a stop to it. Stop reacting in kind with an eye for an eye. Compassion and fairness creates justice and justice and fairness will conquer this problem if we just have the will to work together and have compassion for people who aren't just like us.

'Terrorist' is just name calling. It is no better than calling someone a witch, Communist, or any other branding. People do not act irrationally unless pressed to do so. Do some research and try to see why they're so crazy. I admit, the fervor they exert is nuts, but they have a reason. They've been under our gun and poltical noose too long, and they retaliate.

You'd do the same if Red China came to your town with tanks, yelling at you in Chinese, and raped your sister. Durka Durka indeed...

The Left and Right agree on more than you think. The Left understands that we as America are under attack. But they also understand that we are only under attack because we attack others. That's not self-loathing, that's understanding and compassion.

Bless you.

Mary said...

And bless you, too, Cedric.

Just wondering...

Were you living in a shack in Montana when you wrote that manifesto?

Just kidding. :)

I'll respond to this segment of your comment:

The Left and Right agree on more than you think. The Left understands that we as America are under attack. But they also understand that we are only under attack because we attack others. That's not self-loathing, that's understanding and compassion.

You don't read my blog often.

If you did, you'd know that I say that our differences, though significant, are few compared to all that we share.

You're wrong about America being under attack because we attack others. That's just flat-out false. You can't back that up.

I respectfully suggest that you read some history. You don't have to go back too far. The 90s will suffice.