McCain, Lieberman channeling Cheney

[Ardent15]

"Last Dec. 18, a New York Times editorial grimly prophesied that President Obama, "like George W. Bush, will decree that the entire planet is a battlefield and anyone arrested anywhere on terrorism charges may be tried in military tribunals." Obama hasn't quite gone that far, but he has seriously proposed permanent detention for terrorism suspects who can't be tried because alleged evidence against them has been obtained by torture.

However, on March 4, Sens. John McCain and Joseph Lieberman introduced a bill that is a startling assault on the U.S. rule of law. Its title: "Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act of 2010." This radical bipartisan law, if enacted, would require that anyone anywhere in the world, including American citizens, suspected of involvement in terrorism — including "material support" (otherwise undefined) — can be imprisoned by the military on the authority of the president as commander in chief. Sound familiar?

Those to be held, according to McCain and Lieberman, will be designated as "unprivileged enemy belligerents," the current Obama name for what Bush and Cheney called "unlawful enemy combatants."

I have read the entire McCain-Lieberman bill, and their dragnet of "detainees" is so wide that it includes not only suspected members of al-Qaida but also individuals of "potential intelligence value" and other categories "as the president considers appropriate."


http://www.pottsmerc.com/articles/2010/04/05/opinion/srv0000007963622.txt

[vixengrl]

1. Wait--this sentence just broke my justice-o-meter--

<i>Obama hasn't quite gone that far, but he has seriously proposed permanent detention for terrorism suspects who can't be tried because alleged evidence against them has been obtained by torture.</i>

Um, now, I'm just a process-loving fool. And I get that just because a person was picked up because of a "bite from the poisoned apple" doesn't mean they aren't guilty as sin of something. But rules is rules.

So, why not let them off and presume reasonable cause to follow them just in case which actually would be a better intelligence tool than locking them up forever without due process? If they are really baddies, we finally nail them, if not...mfff, we didn't jail an innocent guy.