1/09/03
This whole "enemy combatant" thing has me boiling. And what inspired this essay was a poll on CNNs
web site asking, "Should the U.S. government have the authority to hold citizens in military custody
if it deems them to be a threat?"
Would you believe 61% of the country said "Yes?" 61% of our country clearly does not understand what's
going on here, didn't read the question, or they're just plain retarded. First of all, to get this out
of the way, if you're found in a foreign country, fighting against the U.S. for the enemy, then yes, sure,
you're an enemy combatant.
What's going on in this country right now is that the president, a person who I don't have a great deal of
respect for, and the attorny general, who I think is a raving lunatic, can pick people out and say, "He's an
enemy combatant," or "She's an enemy combatant." That's it. Case closed. They can haul that person off to a
military prison. They don't have to charge them with anything. They have NO rights. They have no rights to
see an attorney. They have no right to remain silent, no right against self incrimination. Nothing.
The president or attorney general needs no real evidence. There's no oversight of this process. They simply pick
someone and that's it. To put this in historical context, this is how Sadam Houssein operates. This is how Hitler
and Stalin operated. People, this is insane!
The first ten amendments to the constitution are known as the Bill of Rights. Amendment VI is as follows:
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial
jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously
ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses
against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel
for his defence."
I've read the constitution and I've read the bill of rights. I don't see where it says they can lock you up
in jail, throw away the key, and dispose of all your rights granted by the constitution and bill of rights. I've
looked, and I just can't find that section.
Every U.S. citizen is guaranteed certain rights under the constitution. Well, they were, up until the moment they
were labeled an "enemy combatant." At which point, you throw all those rights out the window. The law that
allows this had a purpose, but it doesn't take much to abuse this law and frankly, it's being abused right now.
I simply can't understand how one can reconcile being a patriot and support this law at the same time. This law goes against
every single fundamental rights guaranteeed by the documents upon which this country is based. The two are entirely
contradictory.
At the very least, a person should have a trial to see whether or not they can be labeled as enemy combatants. At
the very least, they should get this. Right now, the government is labeling people as enemy combatants because
they have no case otherwise. I'm sorry, I understand some of these people may be a risk, but I'd rather we
accept that risk than the far graver risk of throwing our most basic freedoms out the window. It's just wrong,
and I think our founding fathers would be ashamed of what is happening right now. It is precisely this sort
of tyranny they were trying to avoid.
When I first heard the description of an enemy combatant, I was stunned that something like this could happen
in our country. A country where we cherish freedom and the rights of individuals. Understand people, the right
of free speech is at risk here. If I come out and verbally support an enemy of this country, THAT IS MY RIGHT!
As long as I don't go off an fight for them and I don't support them in a tangible way, I have the right to believe,
and to preach if I want, what I believe. That's what free speech means. It means that I have the right to espouse my beliefs
no matter what anyone else thinks, no matter how unpopular they may be. I have that right. You do too, if you're
an American citizen. Sure, I hate hearing people champion some wholey obscene cause. The KKK, for example.
But it's their right. There have been a lot of things this country has done, that may have been popular, but that
I have believed were wrong, and I felt safe telling people my beliefs. Now, I don't feel as safe about
that as I used to. It's a very dangerous place for us to be and I think we should all be more concerned about it.
Look, if you're a foreign national in this country, you're not an American citizen. You don't have the rights
of an American citizen, and if you get labeled an enemy combatant, that's too bad. But American citizens have the
right to a fair trial. They have the right to not be held without evidence that a crime has been committed. The
government should not have the right to imprison people simply because it's convenient to do so. To imprison them
without charging them because they can't mount a case against them. If the government has no case, then perhaps
these people have done nothing to warrant their imprisonment. But who will know? If they're locked away
without a trial and with no rights, how will we ever know whether or not they're truely guilty of anything?
They could have simply been at the wrong place at the wrong time. Pissed off the wrong person. We don't know.
Do you trust the government that much? I don't.
I consider myself a patriot. On 9/11, I was on vacation in Mexico, and I cried watching planes fly into the trade
center. My heart was engulfed in hate for those that did it. They are animals and they deserve the worst, but if any
of them are American citizens on American soil, they have the right to a fair trial. John Walker Lindh for example.
There's someone you can label an enemy combatant. He was in Afghanistan fighting with the enemy. But they didn't
label him an enemy combatant. They flew him back to the U.S. and gave him a fair trial and due process. If they don't
label him an enemy combatant, how can they possibly label citizens in this country enemy combatants? It just doesn't
make any sense at all. But, it does. Why wasn't he labeled an enemy combatant? Think about it. What did the government
have with him that they don't have against these others? A case. That's what they have.
Sorry, but I don't trust John Ashcroft. I don't trust George W. Bush. Trust is earned and they haven't come close
to earning my trust. And I hope that more Americans will start to rethink their opinions on this kind of stuff. I
would highly recommend reading "Founding Brothers," by Joseph Ellis, or "The Federalist Papers," by James Madison,
Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, et. al. Or might I suggest, "The Constitution of the United States," also by James Madison,
et. al. "Bill of Rights?" How can anyone possibly support this kind of treatment of U.S. citizens by their own government?
Imagine it was you. Saying the wrong thing to the wrong people. Bang, you're in jail. Can't speak to a lawyer, no
due process. Imagine what that's like? Read about all the citizens of the Soviet Union who had this happen to them
because they said something that was unpopular with the government. And then decide if you still think this is
right.
