nancylebov: blue moon (Default)
[personal profile] nancylebov
McCain and Leiberman have proposed a bill which allows for indefinite detention of American citizens at the president's whim.

Niemöller [1] is not mocked.

The whole point of "enemy combatant" was to put people outside the law, so that the government could do whatever it pleased to them. The law isn't an absolutely reliable protection, but it's a good bit better than nothing.

It was obvious to me that there was no reason for American government lawlessness to be limited to people who aren't American citizens.

I don't take the abuse of non-Americans lightly. A good bit of the anger in this post is for the Americans who thought indefinite detention without charge could only happen to someone else.

SEC. 5. DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL OF UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS.

An individual, including a citizen of the United States, determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent under section 3(c)(2) in a manner which satisfies Article 5 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War may be detained without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported, consistent with the law of war and any authorization for the use of military force provided by Congress pertaining to such hostilities.


Information about the bill from Glenn Greenwald, from an article at The Huffington Post which I found out about it because Steve Barnes was interested in the people from the French Television show who weren't willing to give big electric shocks.

I'm feeling let down by my friendslist. What happened to the glory days when every frightening thing the government was doing was urgent news? Teapartyers behaving like assholes is not a substitute.

Perhaps I'm being unfair-- I don't follow facebook or twitter, and lj's been kind of quiet lately. Has anyone else heard about this monstrous bill?

Anyway, here are the sponsors of the bill:
Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]

Scott Brown [R-MA]

Saxby Chambliss [R-GA]

James Inhofe [R-OK]

George LeMieux [R-FL]

Joseph Lieberman [I-CT]

Jefferson Sessions [R-AL]

John Thune [R-SD]

David Vitter [R-LA]

Roger Wicker [R-MS]

More, more, more. Did Obama really authorize INTERPOL to operate independently in the US, without regard for the bill of rights.


[1] First they came for the..... and when they finally came for me, there was no one to speak up.

Date: 2010-03-19 01:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] schemingreader.livejournal.com
I looked up the Interpol thing. You can read the executive orders here: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12425

There's no mention of Constitutional abridgement. It's basically to let Interpol operate like an embassy (well, I don't know, not a lawyer, I'm just reading the damn thing. You read it and see what you think.) The main difference between the Reagan and Clinton versions and the Obama version is taxes. Obama's given them a tax break, who knows why.

Date: 2010-03-19 01:55 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nancylebov.livejournal.com
From section 2: (b) International organizations, their property and their assets, wherever located, and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy the same immunity from suit and every form of judicial process as is enjoyed by foreign governments, except to the extent that such organizations may expressly waive their immunity for the purpose of any proceedings or by the terms of any contract.

I don't know whether this means they're immune from prosecution for what would ordinarily be called crimes.
Edited Date: 2010-03-19 01:56 am (UTC)

Date: 2010-03-19 02:06 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] schemingreader.livejournal.com
I think it makes them like an embassy. Google says:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_mission#Extraterritoriality

"Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws)"

Here's what US Interpol says in the .pdf on the page at the link text, " Expanding INTERPOL's privileges and immunities in the United States":


The new order does not enable or authorize INTERPOL or its officials to conduct searches or seizures, make arrests or take any other law enforcement actions in the United States.
The additional privileges and immunities accorded include:
  • Immunity from search and confiscation of its property and archives;

  • Exemption from customs duties and taxes related to the importation of baggage and household effects;

  • Exemption from federal income tax and Social Security contributions;

  • Exemption from federal property taxes.



I wonder why they don't have to pay social security and income taxes? I'm guessing this is a sort of bribe to get Interpol to do more for us on the terror/intelligence front. It kind of sucks for US employees of Interpol, doesn't it?

Date: 2010-03-19 02:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] schemingreader.livejournal.com
I have good Google Fu tonight!

I worry about our government's motivations, but I'm actually more worried about the accidental repercussions of things they do without trying to generate a huge conspiracy.

Date: 2010-03-19 10:09 am (UTC)
ext_58972: Mad! (Default)
From: [identity profile] autopope.livejournal.com
I wonder why they don't have to pay social security and income taxes?

Because they're not Americans?

If I visit the USA for more than 30 days I'm supposed to go talk to the IRS about paying tax. So, to preserve my "non-resident alien" status I don't do that -- I never visit for more than 3 weeks.

Presumably INTERPOL has situations where officers -- who are citizens of other nations -- have to visit the USA and work there for more than 30 consecutive days, and they don't want to bug cops working a case with the hassle of registering with a foreign tax authority and paying tax in two jurisdictions simultaneously in the middle of a sufficiently serious criminal investigation that there are cops working overseas for months on end.
Edited Date: 2010-03-19 10:09 am (UTC)

Date: 2010-03-19 12:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] schemingreader.livejournal.com
But the original executive order from Reagan did obligate them to all of those taxes, so this is new. Interesting that the supposedly anti-taxation president levied the taxes on them! Plus I'm not sure that the order means the employees of Interpol are exempted from the taxes. So they might have to still pay taxes in two jurisdictions simultaneously. US employees of the organization have to pay out of pocket, since there's no payroll deduction.


Anyway, the point is that Obama didn't give Interpol new law-enforcement privileges in the US. He reissued an Executive Order and changed their tax status.

Date: 2010-03-19 02:55 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] redneckgaijin.livejournal.com
I don't know whether this means they're immune from prosecution for what would ordinarily be called crimes.

Yes, it does- diplomatic immunity, except where Interpol has waived immunity as part of, say, the treaty that forms Interpol in the first place.

So Interpol can double-park and ignore the tickets, but they can't arrest anyone without the cooperation of local officials.

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11 121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 15th, 2025 11:06 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios