Lee at 75 — Why do you assume that they were caught on the battlefield? A large number of the folks in Guantanimo were turned over for bounties by rival tribes — we paid them to give us people that, in large numbers, have turned out to have absolutely nothing to do with terrorism. We are currently holding over 80 people who have had hearings in Guantanimo, been deemed to have been detained wrongfully and to have had no dealings with terrorism, attacks against the US forces or otherwise, but because we have held them in Guantanimo and branded them as “terrorists” for years now, no one wants them back.

So we are stuck, indefinitely warehousing innocent people whose reputations we tarnished, who cannot go back to their homes or families — and we have held them for years — without being able to bring a single, solitary charge against them. That is wrong. And had they had access to habeas review earlier in this process, we would not have been holding them for years because the government would have been required to show proof that they were being rightfully and lawfully held.

The Bush Administration is doing this in your name. And mine. And I, for one, have had enough. See here, here, here, and here for starters on this. And I can link up even more — this barely scratches the surface. We are better than this, or we ought to be — and I refuse to act like we don’t have to follow the law or our ethical obligations because some scary terrorists yell boo. We either live up to who we say we are, or we are nothing more than a shell game with an illusory Constitution and a sham king sitting on a throne marked President. My ancestors did not fight for a free America for nothing — and I’m not about to shame myself by rolling over for another wannabe King George, either.

And I don’t think the rest of us plan to either! Congress got us into this, now let them get us out, or let them get out! This is the Constitution the boy king is messing with!

Hello all,

I just had a short, terse conversation with one of the directors in Skelton’s office.

(I didn’t request one, he picked up. Christy, I remained pleasant, honest. The impression was that they are getting hammered with calls.)

He wouldn’t give his name, just his title, and he insisted that this was too important a subject to be inserted in the bill. That it needs to be a stand alone, to see openly, who will vote for or against. When I asked when the new bill would be brought out, he said, this summer.

When I mentioned the people who have been denied their rights, some for years now, he asked if I was a constituent. Told no, he suggested that I contact my own Representatives, and ended the call.

Still calling, e-mailing, but, this does seem to be their plan, for now, anyway.

Apparently they were told to put a lid on it, because I just called them, made my point, and they said, thank you, and we’ll convey your thoughts to the chairman.

habeus corpus, what’s that?

Is this a proper summary?
Due to the volume of calls Skelton decided to make this a separate bill and not include it in the Defense Department Authorization bill.

on another front

Dodd has another bill addressing the restoration of habeas corpus.

I’m horrible with phones but can e-mail. None of the representatives in the Armed Services Committee are from my district. Would it still be useful to e-mail all house members?