raiha
12-30-2007, 04:34 PM
"In order to respect the President's inherent constitutional authority to manage a military campaign, 18 USC # 2340A (the prohibition against torture) must be construed as inapplicable to interrogations undertaken pursuant to his Commander-in-Chief authority.
Congress lacks authority under Article 1 to set the terms and conditions under which the President may exercise his authority as Commander-in Chief to control the conduct of operations during a war. The President's power to detain and interrogate enemy combatants arises out of his constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief." Working Group Report on Detainee Interrogations in the Global War on Terrorism.
“The true meaning of the War on Terror is that the sovereign, the president, has made the decision to implement the state of exception as the norm….Taken in isolation the camps in Guantanamo remain the exception to this ordinary functioning. Yet it is the intention of the Administration to be able to designate as enemy combatants even American citizens “captured” on American soil. Thus it is a mistake to take these camps in isolation from the other paraphernalia of the War on Terror (surveillance etc) This includes all those fundamental changes to the understanding of legal rights that come with those Acts which come with “homeland security.”…There is a transformation of the understanding of the RELATION of citizen to state.
What is involved is a stripping back of rights, but, but this must be understood correctly. It is not simply the growth of authoritarian law, even though it is this too. Rather, what is occurring is the reduction of the citizen to a mere life, whether it is being controlled by the state or protected. In fact, control and protection converge, as the citizenry gives up the notion that the sovereign is instituted by the people, and the properly Hobbesian sovereign emerges, to whom the citizenry has given up its very right of life on the grounds of the greater security and protection of the Leviathan.”
“What is occurring in the Cuban camps to enemy combatants of foreign lands mirrors what is occurring in the homeland. And that is the transformation of the conception of the people as the inaugurators and the embodiment of politics and law, bearing rights and freedoms, to a conception of the public as acted upon by a governmental machine preoccupied with protection and security. With this preoccupation the very concept of sovereignty may in the end by sacrificed in favour of the security of the situation itself. Beyond sovereignty, beyond law, the eventual outcome of the logic of security is just the concern with the situation itself. Security without even the need for the notion of sovereignty: the global camp.”
Excerpt “Violent Democracy” Daniel Ross p.148 -51
Congress lacks authority under Article 1 to set the terms and conditions under which the President may exercise his authority as Commander-in Chief to control the conduct of operations during a war. The President's power to detain and interrogate enemy combatants arises out of his constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief." Working Group Report on Detainee Interrogations in the Global War on Terrorism.
“The true meaning of the War on Terror is that the sovereign, the president, has made the decision to implement the state of exception as the norm….Taken in isolation the camps in Guantanamo remain the exception to this ordinary functioning. Yet it is the intention of the Administration to be able to designate as enemy combatants even American citizens “captured” on American soil. Thus it is a mistake to take these camps in isolation from the other paraphernalia of the War on Terror (surveillance etc) This includes all those fundamental changes to the understanding of legal rights that come with those Acts which come with “homeland security.”…There is a transformation of the understanding of the RELATION of citizen to state.
What is involved is a stripping back of rights, but, but this must be understood correctly. It is not simply the growth of authoritarian law, even though it is this too. Rather, what is occurring is the reduction of the citizen to a mere life, whether it is being controlled by the state or protected. In fact, control and protection converge, as the citizenry gives up the notion that the sovereign is instituted by the people, and the properly Hobbesian sovereign emerges, to whom the citizenry has given up its very right of life on the grounds of the greater security and protection of the Leviathan.”
“What is occurring in the Cuban camps to enemy combatants of foreign lands mirrors what is occurring in the homeland. And that is the transformation of the conception of the people as the inaugurators and the embodiment of politics and law, bearing rights and freedoms, to a conception of the public as acted upon by a governmental machine preoccupied with protection and security. With this preoccupation the very concept of sovereignty may in the end by sacrificed in favour of the security of the situation itself. Beyond sovereignty, beyond law, the eventual outcome of the logic of security is just the concern with the situation itself. Security without even the need for the notion of sovereignty: the global camp.”
Excerpt “Violent Democracy” Daniel Ross p.148 -51