| |
|
Research the News for Yourself!
News World :: Lasting News
Date This Page Last Edited: Saturday, April 8, 2008
In an Uncertain World...
Face the Future Without Fear!
Think differently!
Matthew 3:2
To Search this Site -
click
here.
H abeus
Corpus Overview
Overview of Habeus
Corpus
Source: Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia
http://www.HabeasCorpus.net/asp/
The writ of habeas corpus has historically been an important instrument for the safeguarding
of individual freedom
against arbitrary state action. Habeas Corpus
Source: Wikipedia
H abeas
Corpus
is an ancient common law prerogative writ - a legal procedure to which
you have an undeniable right.
It is an extraordinary remedy at law. Upon
proper application, or even on naked knowledge alone, a court is
empowered,
and is duty bound, to issue the Extraordinary Writ of Habeas
Corpus commanding one who is restraining liberty to forthwith
produce
before the court the person who is in custody and to show cause why the
liberty of that person is being restrained.
Absent a sufficient showing
for a proper restraint of liberty, the court is duty bound to order the
restraint eliminated and the
person discharged.
Source:
http://www.habeascorpus.net/asp/
For the executive power of the United States, the fight
against terrorism is a war and not an ordinary
police operation. Based on this interpretation, it has put in place a
group of liberty-destroying
measures ostensibly justified by the state of emergency. The suppression
of habeas corpus for
foreigners suspected of terrorism and the establishment of a continual
surveillance of the whole
population are thus made possible.
Reference to a state
of war has allowed the government to treat foreign “terrorists” as
enemies and
thereby incarcerate them administratively, without indictment or trial,
until the end of the conflict.
Since the war is ongoing and indeterminate, the detention of these
persons is likewise indeterminate.
These “enemy combatants” no longer have the protections accorded to
prisoners of war.
Since they
“violate the laws of war,” they are not regular combatants, but “illegal
combatants” who are not
protected by international conventions.
As a result, the foreigner designated as an “illegal enemy
combatant” by the executive power is entirely subject to the
arbitrariness of the latter.
Source: http://www.cageprisoners.com/prisoners.php?pri_id=174
In
common law,
habeas corpus
Latin: [We command that] you have the body) is the name of a legal action
or
writ by means of which detainees can seek relief from unlawful imprisonment .
There is, however, no legal time limit which would force the government to provide a
Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) hearing. Prisoners are legally prohibited from petitioning any court
for any reason before a CSRT hearing takes place.
On
January17,
2007, Attorney General Gonzales asserted in Senate testimony that while habeas corpus is
"one of our most cherished rights," the United States Constitution does not expressly guarantee habeas rights
to United States residents or citizens. As such, the law could be extended to US citizens and held if left
unchecked.[1]
To date, there have been a number of confirmed cases in which non-American civilians have been incorrectly
classified as enemy combatants.
[2]
On
June 7,
2007, the
Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007 was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee
with an 11-8 vote split along party lines, with all but one
Republican voting against it.[3]
On June 12 2006, a federal appeals court ruled that
Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, a legal resident of the
United States, could not be detained indefinitely without charge. In a two-to-one ruling by the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Court held the President of the United States lacks legal authority to
detain al-Maari without charge; all three judges ruled that al-Maari is entitled to traditional habeas corpus
protections which give him the right to challenge his detainment in a U.S. Court.
Source/Article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning
http://en.WikiPedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus
Source: WikiPedia.org Note. Might not reflect later edits to WikiPedia pages.
Habeus Corpus in the News :: Suspension of Legal Rights
::
Gitmo Bay
Story
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Remember the news from: January 19, 2007
Source: Baptist Press News
Senate passes lobbying bill without restricting free speech......bill
that would have threatened
churches and pro-family groups with fines if they failed to register their actions with the
government when informing people on moral issues.
More... Source/Story...
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=24801
www.bpnews.net
Story to keep following...
Section 220 of the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act, known as S. 1
WASHINGTON (BP)--By a vote of 55-43, the Senate approved an amendment Jan. 18, 2007 that
struck the controversial section of an ethics reform bill that would have threatened churches and
pro-family groups with fines if they failed to register their actions with the government when
informing people on moral issues. With the language of Section 220 stricken from S. 1, the Senate
passed the sweeping ethics reform bill by a vote of 96-2 a day after the measure appeared dead
because of an impasse between parties regarding a line-item veto amendment.
The part of the bill that was struck, "...As soon as they spend the money to buy the mailing list,
there is a paid lobbyist involved, and if the registration is not correct, there is a $200,000 fine
against that group if we leave this provision in the bill as it is.”
Source/Story: www.bpnews.net/
Source:
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=24801
Updates from:
http://www.hslda.org/Legislation/National/2007/S1/default.asp
Lobbying Bill Will
Violate Free Speech And The Right To Freely Petition Government
January 12, 2007 - Washington, DC – “The Traditional Values Coalition is deeply concerned about the grassroots lobbying requirements in Section 220 of S.1, Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act,” said TVC Chairman Louis P. Sheldon today.
“Section 220 is a direct assault on the First Amendment and the right of citizens to freely petition their government for a redress of grievances!
“This legislation will place onerous reporting requirements on individuals and organizations that lobby our national leaders on issues of importance to them. And, it will impose draconian fines – including potential criminal penalties – for failure to obey these new lobby restrictions.”
Pastor Sheldon points out that Section 220 will target any organization with more than 500 supporters or if a communication reaches 500 or more individuals. Those affected include every blogger, every church, every non-profit or any group that uses direct mail, telephone calls, newspaper or print ads, paid organizers, radio and TV ads and Internet communications.
“The reporting requirements and penalties in Section 220 will place incredible financial and time burdens on grassroots groups as well as potential fines – thus making it less likely that these groups risk communicating with their members on important issues. This cleverly-written section doesn’t directly assault free speech, but it creates a climate of fear that chills free speech,” said Rev. Sheldon. “Will a small grassroots group speak out if it fears being fined for failing to file the correct reports to Congress? This legislation is a subversion of our First Amendment rights.”
Pastor Sheldon notes that this will have a serious impact on pastors! “A pastor, for example, who uses the church bulletin to oppose an anti-Christian bill, will be considered a lobbyist and must register his church as a lobbying firm! This is unacceptable!
“The curious thing about this legislation is that it exempts labor unions, corporations and even foreign companies from these reporting requirements. Yet, these are the entities that are most likely to engage in unethical lobbying activities – not small grassroots groups,” said Rev. Sheldon.
“TVC is calling on the U.S. Senate to support the Bennett amendment to remove the grassroots provisions from S. 1. This section clearly tramples on our First Amendment rights to free speech and the right of every citizen to petition his government!
Source:
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2983
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/
Senate passes lobbying bill without restricting free speech...
WASHINGTON (BP)--By a vote of 55-43, the Senate approved an amendment Jan. 18, 2007 that struck the controversial section of an ethics reform bill that would have threatened churches and pro-family groups with fines if they failed to register their actions with the government when informing people on moral issues.
“We’re delighted that members of the Senate understood the grave nature of putting severe restrictions on the free speech of churches and non-profit organizations,” Sekulow said in a Jan. 19, 2007 news release. “While the troubling language was removed from the Senate measure, we’re still deeply concerned that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others will attempt to push through these dangerous restrictions in the House.
"This legislation says that grassroots lobbying is defined as members of the general public communicating with their congressmen or encouraging others to do the same,"
Sen. Robert Bennett, R.-Utah, said of the original bill while promoting the amendment on the Senate floor. "I thought that's what we were all supposed to do. I was taught in civics class in high school that everyone had the right to do that without being forced to register and report all of their connections if somebody pays for it.
"Sekulow explained in a post on the ACLJ website that the House could take up such legislation as early as the week of Jan. 22, 2007 and indications are that Pelosi will insert the grassroots lobbying legislation provision into the House's bill on lobbying reform.
"Once passed, it will require a conference committee between the House and the Senate," Sekulow wrote.
"We are not out of the woods yet on this important matter. Momentum continues to build, and we need to now turn our efforts to the United States House of Representatives."
The USA Capitol switchboard number is (202) 224-3121
Rest of the story... Source:
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=24801
www.bpnews.net
More News...
_________________________________________________________________________________________
The hiring of
private security contractors, like Blackwater, have been an important part
of the overall military strategy.
It seems that the
projection of American power demands more manpower than we can recruit at
military pay grades.
Companies like
Blackwater offer much higher rates of pay for professional soldiers,
especially for those with specialized
training like Navy
Seals. Some of these soldiers have been recruited from other countries,
including countries like
South Africa and
Chile, where the military has engaged in systemic and severe human rights
abuses.
Rest of the story...
Source: http://www.religiousliberty.info/blog/?p=48
The global union movement is calling on the U.S. and Indian governments to
take
legal
action against
Signal International,
a marine construction company,
and two of its
recruiters.
Nearly 100 Indian
workers say they were enticed to come to work at the company’s shipyard in
Pascagoula, Miss., (USA) where they say they were
held in modern-day
slavery.
Source/Story:
http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/03/22
indian-workers-say-they-are-treated-like-slaves-at-mississippi-shipyard/
AR In Touch:
Jan 20, 2008
The president (USA) states in writing that
he is not going to obey and will not be bound by four parts of a
law duly passed by the Congress.
Just so you know that we’re not talking
about the naming of a bridge or a new ship, the four provisions
of the act which the president is
going to ignore are:
* the establishment of a commission to
investigate contractor fraud in Afghanistan and Iraq
* the protection or whistleblowers who report contractor fraud
from harassment or official retribution
* a requirement that US intelligence agencies respond to
Congressional requests for documents
* a ban on funding for any permanent military bases in Iraq, and
on any actions that would seek to give the US control over
Iraq’s
oil resources or oil money. Source/Story:
http://dailyscare.com/2945/capitol-crime-of-the-century-time-for-congress-to-stand-up
●
The mass media has been organized along one-way lines: it flows
from top to bottom, from the center to the periphery,
from the few to the many, from the 'information rich' to the
'information poor'; conditioning the minds of many people
- not
only in terms of the media's content but also by creating a
mass media mentality'.
Many think that this is the way the media has to work.
Even those who advocate horizontal flow are often only concerned
with an increase in the number of channels, the diversification
of content and localization of media. They still adhere to the
basic top-down principle! On the other hand, ...
http://www.wacc.org.uk/index.php/wacc/about_wacc/principles
●
Continuous Partial Attention: describes the way that today's
computers and wireless devices render us ever-vigilant about
the
flow
of information, but never fully engaged in any one subject --
results in halfway thinking, uncompleted tasks and a
decline in
productivity.
Source/Story:
http://www.curledup.com/dof.htm
●
Jacqueline Boatwright will speak Wednesday in Savannah about her
son who was permanently injured at a day-care
that was not required by law to have liability insurance.
Source:
http://www.savannahnow.com/node/163692
Persecution.TV
The Voice of the Martyrs
Advanced Search ::
Multiple Languages
>
http://clusty.com/search?&form=advanced&v%3aframe=form&
Research the News for Yourself!
Copy and paste
Search Terms into search box, above.
dirt cookies
north american union usa
direct to home
(or click >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-To-Home
CIA waterboarding torture
A Nation of Sheep: Books: Andrew P.
Napolitano
Habeus Corpus in the News Suspension of Legal Rights
Section 220
interlocking directorates
free speech
Fema
USA Patriot Act
AP Gets Shocking New Report on
Gitmo
Gitmo
Eurocontrol
secret flights
Fiji
News Alerts!
Media Policy
in Washington
|
