What do Peloisi and Reid say when someone mentions Joseph Padilla

[Toots]

A US Citizen, kidnapped off the streets of Chicago and whisked away to a foreign country where he spent five years in a six by eight cage, tortured and humiliated and never charged or allowed any right as citizen of the USA. He was named "Enemy combatant" although he never fired a shot or even held a weapon. Why is this not an Impeachable Offense? If it is not, then I guess no American citizen is safe from such abuse. I was under the impression the US Constitution actually meant something but by the behavior of Peloisi and Reid it does not. Only Power means anything.....

[wildbilln864]

1. K&R! eom

[EFerrari]

2. Maybe he's not "worth it", either. Maybe none of us are?

:mad:

[jgraz]

3. Skinner: we sooo need a :cricketnoise: smiley for posts like this

Or maybe an :offthetable: smiley or a :no-veto-proof-majority: smiley.

[BattyDem]

11. I've never been able to find a cricket noise smiley, but ...

the "lonely tumbleweed" smiley works, too.

[dailykoff]

4. A US citizen imprisoned and tortured without due process

by his own government? That's what freakin' 1776 was all about! According to Jefferson anyway.

K/R! :thumbsup:

[Rex]

5. Well, maybe they will tell you that Habeas Corpus is now suspended

and we have no rights, not under the current law. Well, maybe they won't, but I will.

[treestar]

6. I believe the Administration's position was that we were at war

and that the entire planet constituted the battlefield and therefore, the Chimperor, being the CIC in time of war, had the power to detain anyone based only on his say-so that they were an enemy combatant. Ashcroft and his minions made this argument with straight faces.

At the time the average American smugly believed the Decider would never bother him or her with this type of decision: he/she was not a terrorist and had nothing to hide. Most of them still don't get it.

It's why they allowed the Patriot Act to pass and failed to let it sunset.

[Toots]

7. We/I am aware of the Administration's position, I was asking about Peloisi's and Reid's position.

Do they agree with the Administration's position and if so do you find that troubling? If they do not agree with the Administration's position what are they doing about it?

[treestar]

9. If they were in Congress in 2001, did they vote for the Patriot Act?

That'd be a good hint. Otherwise, they'd have to be asked directly.

Per wikipedia: Pelosi voted for the USA Patriot Act, but has since opposed the extension of provisions that she believes would further curtail individual liberties.<43>

Googling Nancy Pelosi AND Jose Padilla just gets you a bunch of blogs that happen to mention one in a headline link on the same apge with an article about the other.

Reid voted against the Patriot act update, but presumably voted for the act, since IIRR, Feingold was the only Senator who voted against it.

[Toots]

8. He was also denied his right to vote for his Representative and president.

I think denying a US citizen access to an election is a federal crime is it not. He was never charged with any crime during these five years so the argument that he was in prison and therefore not allowed to vote shouldn't apply. If that were to hold up then they could pick up any and all Democrats right before an election and keep them from voting and never charge them..

[treestar]

10. Why the average American cannot see this is wrong shocks me

They just smugly presume it will never be applied to themselves.

If they do indicate it's wrong, they always preface with "I know this Padilla is scum, but..." How do they know he's scum? He hasn't been charged, let alone convicted. (Or hadn't been, at the time).

[struggle4progress]

12. (1) His name is Jose Padilla; (2) Politicians generally don't comment

on cases like this to defend the accused, because they'll look like sh!t if the accused turns out to be guilty; (3) Thus, if politicians comment on cases like this, they're almost always beating the "guilty" drum, which is really unfair to the accused; (4) So I conclude I'm almost always happier if the political crowd keeps its mouth shut about particular cases, though I always believe they can and should take a stand on the larger policy questions, such as detention without trial: and it looks like the Dems are doing that