By Kenneth J. Theisen,
9/27
Over the weekend, the Bush regime and Congressional
Republicans cut yet another deal on proposed legislation on military tribunals
which will give more power to the regime to determine who is an “unlawful enemy
combatant.” The new definition defines
an unlawful enemy combatant as anyone who “has engaged in hostilities or who
has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.”
Just last Thursday, September 21st,
a deal was cut with Senate Republicans to advance the Senate bill legalizing
torture and limitations on detainee rights.
The ink on that deal was not even dry before the regime starting pushing
for this latest change. And where are the Democrats when all of these deals are
being cut. If they are not at the table,
why aren’t they at least exposing what these deals will mean?
Given the Bush regime’s claim that it can indefinitely
detain unlawful enemy combatants in military or CIA prisons and that the
president has the power to determine just who falls into this category we
should be very frightened if this newest change becomes law. This is not just
minor tinkering as some apologists for the regime are claiming. It is a major change which vastly expands the
regime’s power and the new definition applies to U.S.
citizens, U.S.
permanent residents, and foreigners alike. No distinctions are made as to where they are
located. It reminds me of Nazi Germany when the definition of who was a “Jew”
kept changing to encompass more and more “enemies of the state” and of the
Neimoller quote where the Nazi net kept expanding the categories of people
destined for the concentration camps.
The Bush game plan is consistent particularly with compliant
lawmakers. In its legislative proposals
regarding “national security” it first demands such outrageous powers that even
some of the most reactionary legislators recoil. The regime claims that without the “new law”
it can not protect the nation. After
much fanfare, there is a minor compromise by the administration which then
agrees to negotiate. Then when no one is
looking it demands its original proposal or something worse in a slightly
different form. This is what has
happened here with the expanded definition of enemy combatant and the addition
of “supported hostilities” instead of the prior language “engage in acts.”
Just what does “supported hostilities” mean? Remember all the “you are either with us or
against us” rhetoric coming from members of the regime. How often have we been told that those who
oppose the regime’s wars are playing into the hands of the terrorists? Will the
regime decide that critics of the administration are supporting hostilities? The Director of the Center for National
Security Studies, Kate Martin, makes the change clear, “the government intends
the legislation to sanction its seizure and indefinite detention of people far
from the battlefield.”
Given the regime’s past conduct of broadly interpreting laws
and the constitution to expand its power we need to expose and oppose this
latest change. It is nothing short of giving the regime dictatorial powers to
define its enemies and then to imprison them.
That which you will not resist and mobilize to stop, you will learn – or
be forced – to accept.