Cold fury and rage... again

[pecunium]

I'm not as happy as I used to be. Usually it's nothing much, well no, it is... that sense of being irritated with everything, and no fun to be around. That I am not single again is a testament to the power of love.

I could be dramatic, and blame it on Post Traumatic Stress, or something (and some of it is... there are days I don't trust anyone I don't know, and would be willing to harm everyone who falls in that category... those are odd feelings, of walking a tightrope, but I digress) but a lot of it comes from the way I see things going here, the sense that all is fruitless and the Grand Experiment, a Gov't of the People, by the People and for the People is going to perish from this earth.

But then I see things like this:

HR 4674 To prohibit the return of persons by the United States, for purposes of detention, interrogation, or trial, to countries engaging in torture or other inhuman treatment of persons. (Introduced in House) Thomas link (I think that one is permanent)

and I have hope.

Until I see things like this (now, those who read this regularly will know my stand on the use of torture... suffice it to say, because I can't let it pass; and the energy to fulminate on this is taxing, and I slept poorly, my back hurts, the sun was in my eyes and I lost the ball in the lights, that I hate it, with a passion deep and abiding. With so strong, and visceral a reaction that I want to hurt people who say it's useful much less those who try to argue needful),

"Section 3032 and 3033 of H.R. 10, the "9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act of 2004," introduced by House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL). The provision would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue new regulations to exclude from the protection of the U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, any suspected terrorist - thereby allowing them to be deported or transferred to a country that may engage in torture. The provision would put the burden of proof on the person being deported or rendered to establish "by clear and convincing evidence that he or she would be tortured," would bar the courts from having jurisdiction to review the Secretary's regulations, and would free the Secretary to deport or remove terrorist suspects to any country in the world at will - even countries other than the person's home country or the country in which they were born. The provision would also apply retroactively.

(emphasis in original, from Mackeys' Office, underline mine).

Lets see what the text 'ol Denny "Soros is a Drug Kingpin" Hastert actually put in the bill, shall we?

Thomas Link
(a) Regulations-
(1) REVISION DEADLINE- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall revise the regulations prescribed by the Secretary to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, done at New York on December 10, 1984.
(2) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN ALIENS- The revision--
(A) shall exclude from the protection of such regulations aliens described in section 241(b)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(b)(3)(B)) (as amended by this title), including rendering such aliens ineligible for withholding or deferral of removal under the Convention; and
(B) shall ensure that the revised regulations operate so as to--
(i) allow for the reopening of determinations made under the regulations before the effective date of the revision; and
(ii) apply to acts and conditions constituting a ground for ineligibility for the protection of such regulations, as revised, regardless of when such acts or conditions occurred.
(3) BURDEN OF PROOF- The revision shall also ensure that the burden of proof is on the applicant for withholding or deferral of removal under the Convention to establish by clear and convincing evidence that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.
(b) Judicial Review- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court shall have jurisdiction to review the regulations adopted to implement this section, and nothing in this section shall be construed as providing any court jurisdiction to consider or review claims raised under the Convention or this section, except as part of the review of a final order of removal pursuant to section 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1252).
SEC. 3033. ADDITIONAL REMOVAL AUTHORITIES.
(a) In General- Section 241(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in each of subparagraphs (A) and (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting `unless, in the opinion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, removing the alien to such country would be prejudicial to the United States.'; and
(B) by amending subparagraph (C) to read as follows:
`(C) ALTERNATIVE COUNTRIES- If the alien is not removed to a country designated in subparagraph (A) or (B), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall remove the alien to--
`(i) the country of which the alien is a citizen, subject, or national, where the alien was born, or where the alien has a residence, unless the country physically prevents the alien from entering the country upon the alien's removal there; or
`(ii) any country whose government will accept the alien into that country.'; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking `Attorney General' each place such term appears and inserting `Secretary of Homeland Security';
(B) by amending subparagraph (D) to read as follows:
`(D) ALTERNATIVE COUNTRIES- If the alien is not removed to a country designated under subparagraph (A)(i), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall remove the alien to a country of which the alien is a subject, national, or citizen, or where the alien has a residence, unless--
`(i) such country physically prevents the alien from entering the country upon the alien's removal there; or
`(ii) in the opinion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, removing the alien to the country would be prejudicial to the United States.'; and
(C) by amending subparagraph (E)(vii) to read as follows:
`(vii) Any country whose government will accept the alien into that country.'.
(b) Effective Date- The amendments made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply to any deportation, exclusion, or removal on or after such date pursuant to any deportation, exclusion, or removal order, regardless of whether such order is administratively final before, on, or after such date.


So an alien (one wonders what protections an "unlawful enemy combatant" as defined by the Gov't, which, it appears, can be a citizen, might have against this) shall be removed from any protections against torture.

There seems to also be some clever jiggery pokery on the issue of judicial review. The Courts are barred from intervening until after , except as part of the review of a final order of removal pursuant to section 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1252)."

So after the poor sap fails to overcome a presumption of guilt, he has to hope he is allowed to file a petition for a stay of rendition, so the courts can look into the matter… great.

This isn't some shuck and jive, no looking the other way while the Syrians torture a guy, so we can claim, "we never intended them to twist his arms out of his sockets and remove his teeth with a hand drill and a rusty chisel."

Nope, we have joined the Big Leagues… we are going to be grown up about this and make it the law of the land that we can torture people. To prove how enlightened we are about this, we are even going to help the American Economy by requiring it to be outsourced.

I keep thinking my disgust has found it's boundaries, but then they pull shit like this.

Make a stink… point people to these things, drag the filthy sons of bitches out into the cold light of day, and make them admit to the evils they want to do.

We much hold them to account, we must argue with our representatives, tell them that nothing in the rest of that bill is worth this… If we can't do it now, we will have a much harder time of it later.

Hamdi and Padilla were disappeared for a few days, Maher Arar was sent to Syria and tortured, for months, before Syria (that bastion of due process) decided he knew nothing, was innocent, and let him go.

How, pray tell, can the accused, overcome the presumption of guilt, when the trial is secret, he is not allowed access to the courts and can be sent to a country he has no connection to (look at it, anyplace willing to beat the crap out of someone for us can have the poor bastard: is he Iranian, send him to Iraq, Syrian, send him to Israel… oops, they decided torture doesn't work, maybe Singapore wants some brownie points, Chechen… I'm sure the Russians'll be glad to tune him up a bit… ).

This is worse than a crime, it is a mistake… and we are being played for saps. This makes Abu Ghraib a crime, only because we did it ourselves.

I have to stop now, I'm becoming incoherent and losing any focus this started with. Call them, write them, cajole your friends, harangue your opponents, fight this as though your lives depended on it, because I think they do.

Comments

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

that's the query... what one needs is the status (and there is a link to that, on the answer to the query page... can't dive into the text, but one can make a new query, rather than be told you goofed).

H.R. 10

[antiquated-tory.livejournal.com]

Thanks. Looks like both are in committee...