Shooting War Gen-We Getting A Grip Wolves In Sheep's Clothing

H07141

Battle In Seattle
Headlines : Civil Liberties
Summary:

The “unitary executive” doctrine that US Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito advocates allows the President to cite his “powers as Commander in Chief to ignore laws he doesn’t like, spy on citizens without warrants, imprison citizens without charges, authorize torture, order assassinations, and invade other countries at his own discretion.”

The Senator who begins a “disciplined filibuster focused on protecting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights” could attract “traditional conservatives as well as moderates and liberals in a cause larger than any political grouping”. That Senator could create a turning point in American history, and spark a broad defense of the principles of the democratic Republic – principles that “many Americans hold as dear as life itself”.

[Posted By hungeski]
By Robert Parry
Republished from consortiumnews.com
One senator brave enough to grab the floor could start a national political rebirth.

With the fate of the U.S. Constitution in the balance, it’s hard to believe there’s no senator prepared to filibuster Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, whose theories on the ““unitary executive”:http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/011106.html” could spell the end of the American democratic Republic.

If confirmed, Alito would join at least three other right-wing justices – John Roberts, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas – who believe that George W. Bush should possess near total control of the U.S. government during the ill-defined War on Terror. If Anthony Kennedy, another Republican, joins them, they would wield a majority.

Alito’s theory of the “unitary executive” holds that Bush can cite his “plenary” – or unlimited – powers as Commander in Chief to ignore laws he doesn’t like, spy on citizens without warrants, imprison citizens without charges, authorize torture, order assassinations, and invade other countries at his own discretion.

“Can it be true that any President really has such powers under our Constitution?” asked former Vice President Al Gore in a Jan. 16 speech. “If the answer is ‘yes,’ then under the theory by which these acts are committed, are there any acts that can on their face be prohibited?”

The answer to Gore’s final rhetorical question would seem to be…

[end excerpt]
Click here to read the rest of the article
hungeski

Posted by hungeski
for democracy; against fascism - http://TheParagraph.com

Login

Sign up for the GNN newsletter to get the first word on video premieres and breaking news. signup

Read the GNN FAQ for information about the site, forum rules and other GNN 2.0 information. faq

Optimized for FireFox
To download the Firefox web browser, visit mozilla.com Get Firefox

  • Advertise With GNN
  • SUPPORT GNN! Support GNN

    TEES/DVDS @ GNN STORE

    Buy Our Tees
  • Bloggers' Rights at EFF