Skip to main content

House Armed Services Committee putting on magic show

Just moments from now, the House Armed Services Committee will begin a press conference to discuss proposed legislation addressing "America’s Terrorist Detention and Prosecution Policies."

The announcement issued by the HASC's chair Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA) says,

The comprehensive legislation, among other things, would affirm the use of military force against al-Qaeda, the Taliban and affiliated terrorist networks; create certain restrictions which would make it tougher for detainees to return to the battlefield or share information with other terrorists or malign actors; and would permanently block funding for the creation or renovation of any facility in the continental United States to house detainees currently held at Guantanamo Bay.

That's three rather ugly things all bundled into one piece of legislation -- nasty little rabbits all stuffed together in a magician's hat. With a wave of his wand and a tap on the brim, Rep. McKeon will call them something else and insist we don't see a sleight of hand.

First, the affirmation of the use of military force is a reiteration of the original Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, under which the Defense Department has not only been chasing terrorists here and abroad but under which the U.S. continues its occupation of Afghanistan. Those who do not believe we should continue expending resources at the same pace in Afghanistan will not want to extend carte blanche without limitations.

Second, the "certain restrictions which would make it tougher for detainees to return to the battlefield or share information" means at least two things will be codified: indefinite detention including detention without charges, and continued expansion of the government's ability to intercept communications which may or may not be terrorism related in an effort to sort terrorist from not-terrorist communications.

Thirdly, the wording regarding blocking of funding only mentions those detainees currently at Guantanamo Bay; it does not mention detainees still held in any other location, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, other locations across north Africa and offshore on any vessel. It's been pointed out that several trial balloons have been launched regarding the funding of detention facilities within the U.S., but not for the purposes of housing any detainees at GTMO, and at least one of those targeted facilities is in Rep. Buck McKeon's backyard.

The Department of Justice has also been doing the Defense Department's dirty work proving that military facilities can be used for bulk detentions, making the line between DOJ and DOD very fuzzy. In other words, funding for detention facilities in the U.S. might not come from the DOD but the DOJ's budget -- and the DOJ and DOD would work together cooperatively, just as they did on the recent roundup and detention of 100-plus members of organized crime who have been held in the brig at Fort Hamilton, Brooklyn, New York.

It might be time to draft some fax missives to the Democratic members of both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to push back at this deceptive nonsense.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Veep in deep

The Veep "accidentally" shoots a fellow hunter. From here on there is absolutely nothing good about this story. It stinks like curdled milk and three-day-old fish on a summer's day in Dallas. How do we even begin to count the ways in which this reeks? The 22-hour gap: WTF? There's absolutely no excuse for this, we can all agree on this point. But why? Was a key person in this story under the influence of a substance that would take a day to clear? Were they trying to get their stories straight? Heck, could they not come up with a story? Or was the victim not in the clear for that long? The "group" of hunters: Why did it take even longer than the 22-hour gap to identify the third hunter? Why is the media repeatedly using the word "group" to describe two people (Dick Cheney and Pamela Willemore)? The composition of the party: A divorcee ranch owner. An older man who does not appear to be married at this time. A woman sans spouse....
7 comments
Read more

Tinkering in progress

Nuts. I tried to post a rather long piece yesterday, attempting to create an expandable post so that only a lead-in appears on the main blog and the body is expanded only on selection of a link. I'm tripping over the auto-formatting that Blogger inserts into posts; it insists on embedding a begin-font tag all over the place, but no closing font tag. It's driving me nuts! I guess I'll have to try using a post template so that the text on all posts is the same unless indicated otherwise, to try and override the default fonting. Bear with me; you might see what looks like an old post appear between here and the previous post. But enough about me -- how are you?
6 comments
Read more

Meditations on B-School debris...

My body had just reached that state one notch above sleep last night; I was relaxed and warm under the comforter and my husband's arm, when my mind slapped me awake. Christ, they have completely abandoned everything we've been taught in business school. I bolted upright, startling my equally drowsy spouse, and began to scrabble for a pen and paper. I didn't want to blow this off as a dream. I scrawled a note in scant light, reminding myself that this was a nightmare and not a dream. Everything I've been taught they've thrown out the door. They, being this presidential administration. Everything, being the basics we are taught in our earliest days of business school. My mind must have continued to churn after last evening's Book Salon at FireDogLake; Crooked Timber's Henry Farrell and author Jacob Hacker dropped in to chat about Hacker's book, The Great Risk Shift . I've not yet read it, it's on my list (I'm afraid that I'm still b...
4 comments
Read more