Disagree with the Bush Administration, Go to Jail

Flagged by ThisIsTrue from the Rocky Mountain News -

on June 16, Steve Howards was walking his 7-year-old son to a piano practice, when he saw Cheney surrounded by a group of people in an outdoor mall area, shaking hands and posing for pictures with several people...

Howards and his son walked to about two-to-three feet from where Cheney was standing, and said to the vice president, "I think your policies in Iraq are
reprehensible," or words to that effect, then walked on.

Ten minutes later, according to Howards' lawsuit, he and his son were walking back through the same area, when they were approached by Secret Service agent Virgil D. "Gus" Reichle Jr., who asked Howards if he had "assaulted" the vice president. Howards denied doing so, but was nonetheless placed in handcuffs and taken to the Eagle County Jail.

What - they didn't drop him to the ground 2 seconds after he said it, punch his lights out, and take the kid as well?

Kevin Tillman, brother of San Jose native son and Iraq War fatality, Pat Tillman, put it well in a SJ Mercury News Perspective on Sunday:

Somehow subversion of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution is tolerated.

Somehow suspension of habeas corpus is supposed to keep this country safe.

Somehow torture is tolerated.

Somehow lying is tolerated.

Somehow reason is being discarded for faith, dogma and nonsense.

Maybe this years election will change things. Or will we just give up the illusion of a democracy, and crown the Shrub "King Bush"?

The Rule of Law vs. The Rule of Power

President Shrub today signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006, claiming, in part, that the future would judge us on "if we did enough to prevent terrorism".

Couple of ridiculous points:

Removing the concept of the "rule of law", with the US Courts as the ultimate arbiter of what is and isn't allowed (enemy combatants would have no right to sue for being improperly held / charged / treated), is truly un-American. Nothing makes the attacks of 9/11 have more impact than if we throw out our democratic ways in the process of fighting terrorism. Even Americans, detained on US soil, could be labelled "enemy combatants", and never have a chance to a non-military tribunal, where hear-say and dubious evidence (resulting from "non-torture" interrogation techniques, including beatings, sleep and food deprivation, etc. Not allowed by US Military code of conduct, but the CIA has their own methods...)

"If we did enough" - we could bomb the rest of the world (ok - we'll keep Britain and Australia, our staunchest allies, and maybe Israel) and that would greatly reduce the chance of future attacks on America. Is that enough?

A key concepts in the Geneva Convention is that a common set of standards to apply to everyone. If Al Qaida capture American soldiers, tried them without proper legal representation, and then executed them, Americans would be horrified at their barbarism. Only difference is the Military commissions Act of 2006 allows us to do it as a government.

And, the law is retro-active, so it applies to any / all exhisting detainee's lawsuits in US court.