ON THE WALLABY- 2nd August 2006

”The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd." – Alexis de Tocqueville Charles Henri Maurice Clerel, le Comte de Tocqueville (1805-1859) French historian

WHAT COST OUR LIBERTIES AND FREEDOM?

One of the hottest economic debates currently being held, apart from industrial relations and the price of petrol, is that of “bracket creep” with a persons rising income slowly but steadily putting them into a higher tax bracket.

What I see as an even more insidious and dangerous problem is that of what I will call “liberty bracket creep’ and by which I mean the steadily increasing erosion of our civil liberties and freedoms that we all once took for granted.

Politicians as a species worry me for having seen them up close in my time as National President of the Australian Democrats back in the early 1990’s (when that Party amounted to something), I saw men and women who, once they were exposed to the trappings and prestige of power, even as a lowly backbencher, changed in their attitudes to many things they once held dear.

Now, under the guise of “terrorism”, even though more people are killed on the roads than by terrorists, politicians are steadily cranking up the stakes and nowhere is this more evident than in the USA.

When I watch Attorney General Philip Ruddock and his eyes, my instincts ask me “what’s on here?” and whilst the erosion of our liberties here in Australia is nowhere (I think) near that of America, people far smarter than I in the legal and ethical fields are constantly raising concerns about how the bar is being raised

I cannot believe my eyes and ears as I watch and hear the loudness of the inactivity in America against what Bush is doing to that nation and yet nary a word of dissent is heard or printed.

To explain my case, read what I have reproduced below. There, in the supposed “Land of the Free” and the bastion of democracy, Dubya and his zealots are apparently proposing that a US citizen can be taken off the streets, without access to a trial in a court and be held indefinitely.

Goering and his team would have applauded!!

Read on –

Bush submits new terror detainee bill

By ANNE PLUMMER FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer Fri Jul 28, 6:53 PM ET

WASHINGTON - U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill.

A 32-page draft measure is intended to authorize the Pentagon's tribunal system, established shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks to detain and prosecute detainees captured in the war on terror. The tribunal system was thrown out last month by the Supreme Court. Administration officials, who declined to comment on the draft, said the proposal was still under discussion and no final decisions had been made.

Senior officials are expected to discuss a final proposal before the Senate Armed Services Committee next Wednesday.

According to the draft, the military would be allowed to detain all "enemy combatants" until hostilities cease. The bill defines enemy combatants as anyone "engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners who has committed an act that violates the law of war and this statute."

Legal experts said Friday that such language is dangerously broad and could authorize the military to detain indefinitely U.S. citizens who had only tenuous ties to terror networks like al Qaeda.

"That's the big question ... the definition of who can be detained," said Martin Lederman, a law professor at Georgetown University who posted a copy of the bill to a Web blog.

Scott L. Silliman, a retired Air Force Judge Advocate, said the broad definition of enemy combatants is alarming because a U.S. citizen loosely suspected of terror ties would lose access to a civilian court — and all the rights that come with it. Administration officials have said they want to establish a secret court to try enemy combatants that factor in realities of the battlefield and would protect classified information.

The administration's proposal, as considered at one point during discussions, would toss out several legal rights common in civilian and military courts, including barring hearsay evidence, guaranteeing "speedy trials" and granting a defendant access to evidence.

The proposal also would allow defendants to be barred from their own trial and likely allow the submission of coerced testimony.

Senior Republican lawmakers have said they were briefed on the general discussions and have some concerns but are awaiting a final proposal before commenting on specifics.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England are expected to discuss the proposal in an open hearing next Wednesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Military lawyers also are scheduled to testify Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislation is the administration's response to a June 29 Supreme Court decision, which concluded the Pentagon could not prosecute military detainees using secret tribunals established soon after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The court ruled the tribunals were not authorized by law and violated treaty obligations under the Geneva Conventions, which established many international laws for warfare.

The landmark court decision countered long-held assertions by the Bush administration that the president did not need permission from Congress to prosecute "enemy combatants" captured in the war on terror and that al Qaeda members were not subject to Geneva Convention protections because of their unconventional status.

"In a time of ongoing armed conflict, it is neither practicable nor appropriate for enemy combatants like al Qaeda terrorists to be tried like American citizens in federal courts or courts-martial," the proposal states.

The draft proposal contends that an existing law — passed by the Senate last year after exhaustive negotiations between the White House and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. — that bans cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment should "fully satisfy" the nation's obligations under the Geneva Conventions.

Sen. John W. Warner R-Va., chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said Friday he expects to take up the detainee legislation in September.”

What was it Edmund Burke wrote 200 years ago?

Ah yes, I remember, “evil prevails whilst good men remain silent” – so where are you, the voice of the people in Australia and America??

Tony

Tony Fountain

Professional Speaker, auctioneer and author

Sydney NSW Australia

If you would like to subscribe a friend or colleague to these free “On the Wallaby” email bulletins, click here and place their email address in the subscription box .