Ok, lemme get this straight? This U.S. District Judge Henry F. Floyd says that the President of the United States does not have the authority to indefinitely detain Abdullah Al Muhajir (aka Jose Padilla) without charging him for a crime, right? In his decision, Floyd said;
"...the court finds that the President has no power, neither express nor implied, neither constitutional nor statutory, to hold [Padilla] as an enemy combatant."
IMO, Padilla should not be permitted writ of habeas corpus for the simple fact that he has willfully associated himself with a hostile foreign enemy of the state with which we are actively engaged in combat, he had intentionally undergone terrorist training for the sole purpose of attacking our country and we had sufficient testimony with reason to believe that he was originally planning on detonating a nuclear ?dirty bomb? within our borders until those plans were scaled back to only blowing up apartment buildings that were supplied with natural gas. When the DOJ took this bad apple into custody we were shocked when we learned what he was planning to do.
An Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) brief filed by The Cato Institute On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Second Circuit appropriately argues the justification for Padilla?s detention as a military combatant and their ?Summary of Argument? correctly illustrates the President?s Executive Authority in this matter:
Since the September 11th terrorists attacks, the Federal Government has made several sweeping constitutional claims ? that the Executive can seize American citizens, place them in solitary confinement, deny any and all visitation (including with legal counsel), and, in effect, deny the prisoner access to Article III judges to seek the habeas ?discharge? remedy. As long as the Executive has issued ?enemy combatant? orders to his Secretary of Defense, the Government claims, the process comports with the Constitution ? regardless of whether the prisoner is an American citizen or whether the arrest-seizure takes place overseas or on American territory. Repeatedly, the Government conflates three distinct issues: seizure of citizens, imprisonment of citizens, and trial of citizens.
Another Amicus Curiae brief filed by The Commonwealth of Virginia On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Second Circuit also makes a strong argument in support of the President?s Executive Authority:
Given the unusual character of this war, it is appropriate for the judiciary to afford the President a measure of deference in the exercise of his executive authority and as Commander in Chief. When the U.S. military is sent abroad to vanquish terrorist training camps, soldiers have the authority to capture and detain both enemy personnel and their collaborators. This Court has never held that arrest warrants are required in the battlefield. Although the Government complains in general terms about attempts to ?impair? Executive authority, it notably fails to identify any legal challenge to the capture of enemy forces outside of America?s borders. The Government, in short, builds a convincing case against a classic straw man when it argues that the military must have latitude to seize combatants, including combatants who turn out to have been born in America.
What is more important here folks is that we cannot risk divulging sensitive information on activities and contacts of Jose Padilla for fear of compromising our intelligence sources and/or our military strategies. This is no different than what I said a month ago when U.S. District Court Judge Joyce Hens Green ruled that enemy combatants are protected under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution during a time of war!
We cannot allow enemy military combatants to have access to classified information without risking disclosure of covert operations currently in process during this time of war! ?We are extracting valuable information from them about their potential roll in terrorist activity and we cannot afford to divulge sensitive information with the possibility that they will squeal like pigs to our enemies thereby jeopardizing the lives of those who are prosecuting this war on terror!!!
And so folks, I must admit that I am a bit confused today. I guess the real problem I?m having here is deciding who?s more deserving of the dunce cap; U.S. District Court Judge Henry F. Floyd or the nin-com-poop who appointed this non-constructionist nit-wit to a Federal Bench to begin with...... our very own beloved President George W. Bush!
Now there?s gratitude for ya!
No comments:
Post a Comment