From Keith Olbermann's show:
I want to start by asking you about a specific part of this act that lists one of the definitions of an unlawful enemy combatant as, quote, “a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a combatant status review tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense.”Go read it - it's one big money quote and I'm flirting with fair use violations as it is - but before you do, let me address this point:
Does that not basically mean that if Mr. Bush or Mr. Rumsfeld say so, anybody in this country, citizen or not, innocent or not, can end up being an unlawful enemy combatant?
JONATHAN TURLEY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR: It certainly does. In fact, later on, it says that if you even give material support to an organization that the president deems connected to one of these groups, you too can be an enemy combatant.
And the fact that he appoints this tribunal is meaningless. You know, standing behind him at the signing ceremony was his attorney general, who signed a memo that said that you could torture people, that you could do harm to them to the point of organ failure or death.
So if he appoints someone like that to be attorney general, you can imagine who he’s going be putting on this board.
OLBERMANN: Does this mean that under this law, ultimately the only thing keeping you, I, or the viewer out of Gitmo is the sanity and honesty of the president of the United States?
Let's explore that, shall we?
A discussion regarding Bush hearing voices.
An extensive discussion on ol' Chimpy's mental health, with links.
MSNBC reports on the opinion the American people have of Bush's honesty.
This site attempts to document the reasons Chimpy's thought of as dishonest.
As does this one.
And this one, though he's getting behind.
Oh, look. Someone wrote a book.
So, to sum up, we now have a system of government and what I'll mockingly refer to as "law" that rely, not on due process, judicial review, or even the preponderance of evidence, but solely upon the whim - excuse me, sanity and honesty - of a man who is a proven liar and may possibly be a madman.
And the people that tell you the loudest about how they're for God, apple pie, family values and protecting American freedom? Yeah, they're the ones that support this jackass.