The Decider has bravely stepped to the plate in defense of America with the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which is all but certain to pass into law after a 65-34 vote in the Senate. Previously, when a U.S. President has wanted to seize a U.S. citizen and lock them up without trial, there's been all sorts of pesky paperwork and nosy judges to complicate things. I ask you, has paperwork ever stopped an America-hatin' terrorist? When's the last time a judge swung into action, Jack Bauer style, and stopped an attack with a 'contempt of court' headlock?
After all, juries have exhibited a disturbing tendency to find a defendent innocent just because there wasn't any 'untainted' evidence. Also, liberal Clinton-appointed judges have generally held the 
fact that a defendent is obviously Arab-lookin' to be inadmissable as evidence! This is the judicial system we're supposed to trust to keep us safe? Thankfully, with this bill, we won't have to worry about habeas corpus1 any longer. Anyone who is a terrorist, knows a terrorist, looks like a terrorist, or can spell 'terrorist' can now be thrown in a cell, with a secret military tribunal review a few years down the road, time permitting. None of this "I'm an American citizen, I have rights!" hippie nonsense. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the 11 Democrats who bravely defied their treasonous party leadership to pass this bill. Our more dangerous rights are best trimmed through bipartisan effort.
The liberal media, of course, won't stop whining about our 'rights'. They simply ignore the clearly stated right of the President to suspend all other rights to defend us against foreign-lookin' sorts2. The other part of the act they keep harping on is the whole 'torture' issue. If you were to read, say, the New York Times, you might not even know that the bill actually prohibits torture! Interrogators will only be allowed to question detainees with moderate, practically friendly, methods like waterboarding (which only makes people think they're drowning, remember) and long-term exposure to extreme cold (which is probably quite pleasant for those just captured in 110 degree deserts, like Bakersfield). And yes, there's a big difference between letting a pitbull bite someone's nads off and just letting it get really close. These sorts of interrogative techniques have gained us the intelligence necessary to make such great strides in pacifying Iraq and Afghanistan.
If anything, I fear that this bill doesn't go far enough. Give money to a charity that diverts some money to some iffy, Muslim cause, and you disappear, fine. What about people who just would like to give money, but are clever enough not to do so? How do we catch them? Couldn't we require everyone to go in for a weekly polygraph, and ask them how much they like America and our government? How did no one think to add that on, as an amendment or something?
1. Habeas crappus, is more like it.
2. It's in, er, Chapter 3, I think.
Comments