Now hold on a second... declaring war against a country I can understand. But against a group, an organization? Almost as bad as declaring war against a substance like Drugs.Bush law chief seeks new Qaeda war declaration
By Randall Mikkelsen Mon Jul 21, 4:28 PM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080721/pl_nm/security_usa_detainees_dc
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congress should explicitly declare war against al Qaeda to make clear the United States can detain suspected members as long as the conflict lasts, U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey said on Monday.
Mukasey urged Congress to make the declaration in a package of legislative proposals to establish a legal process for terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo, in response to a Supreme Court ruling last month that detainees had a constitutional right to challenge their detention.
"Any legislation should acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us," Mukasey said in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute.
"Congress should reaffirm that for the duration of the conflict the United States may detain as enemy combatants those who have engaged in hostilities or purposefully supported al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated organizations," he said.
Ok I can understand it and appreciate it but it still makes it kinda difficult to wrap my mind around the whole concept.... just part of it anyway but not all the way.
Like the war on drugs, crime, poverty, terror and so on it's not going to end. al Qaeda isn't just Osama Bin Laden and a couple of other guys... it's bigger than that. Like trying to wipe out the drug cartels. A herculean hydra if you will.
These guys aren't the only ones... they're the most visible yes, most well known of course, splattered all over our newspapers how could they NOT be? But there are other groups, organizations and they're not necessarily of Middle Eastern descent.
This line had me saying ... "WRONG!!" when I first read it.
So does this mean if I piss off the President he can point his finger at me and say... "He's a terrorist!" and off I go? That's what it sounds like. That's what it looks like! More importantly... that's what it feels like."Essentially it means that if a president declares someone to be a terrorist, they would then have the authority to hold that person without trial forever," said Chris Anders, senior legislative counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Bush has said the antiterrorism effort would be open-ended.
Mukasey spoke as the first U.S. war crimes trial began at the U.S. Naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where prisoners are held in a detention center condemned internationally for harsh treatment. The Supreme Court's decision on detainee rights did not invalidate trials for those already charged.
The attorney general said the administration already has the authority to detain suspected terrorists. But he said, "It would do all of us good to have the principle reaffirmed, not that that principle itself is in doubt."
Didn't they do this in Germany and Soviet Union? Say anything bad about the government and whoosh... you're not there anymore? That your cause of death was a sudden brain hemorrhage?
Maybe I'm not understanding this though I've read the article twice already to make sure I can believe what my eyes were reading...
Thoughts?