« Q&A with g & i | Main | As long as....................... »
January 18, 2006
Bush & Executive power
On Monday, Former Vice President, Al Gore, had a major speech about power grab by executive branch of our government. Mr Gore has spent most of his life as a respected civil servant, a senator from Tennessee, and the Vice President of united states, during Bill Clinton's presidency. He has been the champion of many environment laws, and defender of american civil liberties. His aspirations for presidency became to end after his narrow loss to George W Bush in 2000 elections.
I have tremendous respect for Mr Gore's opinion but on this point, I beg to differ, under the second Article of the constitution, the president as the head of the executive branch, has the ultimate power to wage war and detain our enemies, also the power to gather information to protect our nation. This power has been used by most of our presidents, from Abraham Lincoln, to Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton. The power has given to an elected president by our forefather, not to the legislative branch, or the Judiciary. Our constitution has proven to be the most important and the most valuable cornerstone of our Federal Government and the reason America has had such growth domestically and internationally.
Surprisingly since 9/11 the legislative body and the Judiciary has come to encroach on this power, by passing laws and reversing precedents. If the same political environment existed during the Civil War, or the second World War, it would have resulted in breaking this nation in half, and the rise of Nazi Germany through out Europe, and the Imperialist Japan in far east. During Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, revoked the writ of habeas corpus and jailed many of his political opponents until the end of the war. Abraham Lincoln is regarded as one of finest presidents, and most influential political power in our young republic.
The president power to detain enemy combatants came to the courts in 1950 in "Johnson v. Eisentrager", to provide more rights to detainees outside the United States's territory. The Supreme court, under and opinion written by Justice Robert Jackson denied such a right. However in 2004, the congress, the same congressmen and senators that defend the merit of the precedent during the Alito confirmation hearing, brought it to themselves to change this precedent and the Supreme Court reversed the law, allowing the enemy combatant, the detainees held in Guantanamo bay ( not a territory of United States), the same privileges to have their day in court as any American Citizen. " Rasul v. Bush ",The majority opinion was written by Justice John Paul Stevens,, with no regard to its encroachment on executive power.
There was also a further amendment to the law "Detainees Provision " passed recently, championed by John Mc Cain of Arizona that allows enemy combatants to appeal the military tribunal rulings to the appeal courts, and limits the military and CIA in their efforts to gather information, and using torture as a tool to reach that end. This is also an encroachment on the executive power, since as we said under the article two of the constitution such power has only been given to the president. There is also the FISA court that again takes the power of the president to use any means to defend us under the constitution and the WAR ACT, that was passed by the congress, and gives the power to an appointed Judges to approve of any surveillance.
The New York Time, in an article, head lined misleadingly as DOMESTIC SPYING AND EASE DROPPING, has written how the Bush administration, has short cut the FISA law, by not obtaining any court approval to spy on the phone conversations between Al qeada Terrorists and their counter parts inside America. The Attorney general Gonzales has defended the administration's action by pointing at how the technology and the rapid changes in counter intelligent surveillance does not allow us the privilege of due process. President Bush is adamant that he has only executed his constitutional power, and he would continue to do so. Mr, Bush Believes he is elected by the majority to be the president and his main duty as the president is to protect American people.
The media has also neglected to inform people that, many senators and congressman, mostly the heads of the committees have been informed of such act, and have been in the know. However not all the representatives have been informed since leaking information has been mostly practiced by our congressmen and senators, and their aids. The New York Times has been privy to this information for more than a year, and the sudden publishing of the article when the Patriot Act was to be renewed by the congress and immediate publishing of a book by the author of the article has not been coincidental.
On Tuesday, the ACLU lawyers brought suite against the government. and if the 2006 election changes the majority and dominance of the republicans in congress, we probably will see committees that would investigate this further, and there has been also whispers of the I word around Washington, Impeachment. Senator Sc hummer has defended the CIA Leakey as a whistle blower, although there is going to be an investigation by the attorney general into the leek and the proponents of it. Mr Gore has also asked for Independent Investigation of the process, and president Bush's authority.
As an American, a Moslem American I have been in support of the Iraq war. and I do believe taking the fight to the enemy has been the best tool in our war against Terror. The reason for the war could be as elementary as Iraq being the weakest dictatorship in Middle East, and the easiest road and scene for us to confront our enemies. Sadam's atrocities, protecting the oil field from the terrorist, and even the idealistic Neo cons plan of bringing democracy and peace to middle east, they all have different places in legitimizing the Iraq war for me. The geo politics of middle east has always been complex. I know there is a cost to the peace and security we all have enjoyed since 9/11. over two thousands young American lives, much more wounded, maimed, and scared for life. Over fifty thousands Iraqis killed on the other side. But I believe our mission in Iraq and in defending ourselves from terrorists is noble, and we would have had many 9/11 since the last one, if we did not take the war to our enemies.
I also believe that the Patriot Act has been a major tool in our fight against he the terrorists, and keeping peace inside our country, and as long as it does not infringe any civil rights of any American citizens, it should be renewed. I also give kudos to Mr Bush for risking his presidency
for the good of the Americans and the country. I also think as many Americans do that the ease dropping on our enemies without the court approval would only help us in our struggle.
Posted by Idinraha at January 18, 2006 11:59 AM
Comments
You said "AS LONG AS it does not infringe any civil rights of any American citizens, it should be renewed."..."ease dropping on our enemies without the court approval would only help us in our struggle."
Yes! "AS LONG AS" people don't do anything wrong, we don't even need any laws barring them from doing so! but we do have the laws because they do wrong. Same applies to the PEOPLE in government. History is full of such wrongs of abusing power.
What if tomorrow someone decided that you, the "moslem american" is "the enemy" and start "ease dropping" on your conversations?
You see my friend you are giving AWAY too many of rights of innocents to find the enemy.
"As long as" you know who the "enemy" is it all sounds good but giving givernment too much power is the beginning of becoming the "enemy" of our civil rights. "Enemy" is doing job turning us to our own enemies.
My right wing moslem american friend, pull slightly to the center before you fall off the road :-)
Posted by: LiveLife ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.idinraha.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 20, 2006 12:24 PM