|
Howdy Pilgrim
Welcome to VetZine's Blog
Concatenation
The linking together
of a series of events or ideas
''The Domino Theory''
we have been warned about.
They say
we are at war
Who is the
Enemy ?
Eastasia ?
Westasia ?
Phantasia ?
Daily Dispatches
from the Trenches
email me
|
Friday, October 20, 2006
Did Bush inadvertently "pocket veto" HR 6166 / Military Commissions Act, meaning this is not really a law?
The following was
Posted by kliljedahl on Wed Oct-18-06 11:09 AM:
Original Post: Did Bush inadvertently "pocket veto" HR 6166?
Senate Passed HR 6166 9/28/06
The following rule applies:
The President - the bill is sent to the President for review.
1. A bill becomes law if signed by the President or if not signed within 10 days and Congress is in session.
2. If Congress adjourns before the 10 days and the President has not signed the bill then it does not become law ("Pocket Veto.")
3. If the President vetoes the bill it is sent back to Congress with a note listing his/her reasons. The chamber that originated the legislation can attempt to override the veto by a vote of two-thirds of those present. If the veto of the bill is overridden in both chambers then it becomes law
Congress Adjourned (09/29/06) before the 10 days. So they will need to have a do over. Now is the time to call, write, email...all of the above to stop this!!!.
A pocket veto is a legislative maneuver in American federal lawmaking. The U.S. Constitution requires the President to sign or veto any legislation placed on his desk within ten days (not including Sundays). If he does not, then it becomes law by default. The one exception to this rule is if Congress adjourns before the ten days are up. In such a case, the bill does not become law; it is effectively, if not actually, vetoed. Ignoring legislation, or "putting a bill in one's pocket" until Congress adjourns is thus called a pocket veto. Since Congress cannot vote while in adjournment, a pocket veto cannot be overridden.
From the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 7: "...If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law. "
Courts have never fully clarified when an adjournment by Congress would "prevent" the President from returning a vetoed bill. Some Presidents have interpreted the Constitution to restrict the pocket veto to the adjournment sine die of Congress at the end of the second session of the two-year Congressional term, while others interpreted it to allow intersession and intrasession pocket vetoes. In 1929, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a bill had to be returned to the chamber while it is in session and capable of work. A three-day recess of the Senate was considered a short enough time that the Senate could still act with "reasonable promptitude" on the veto. However, a five-month adjournment would be a long enough period to enable a pocket veto. Within those constraints, there still exists some ambiguity; Presidents have been reluctant to pursue disputed pocket vetoes to the Supreme Court for fear of an adverse ruling that would serve as a precedent in future cases
Posted by tal on Wed Oct-18-06 11:25 AM
In response to Original Post:
Reply #1: interesting but
I'm willing to bet that there was nothing inadvertent about it but is, in fact, part of 'the plan'.
The real question then, is WT*??!!
The following was
Posted by mberst Wed Oct-18-06 03:48 PM
In response to Original Post:
Reply #2:timeline
9/22/2006:
Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. pursuant to the order of September 21, 2006, as modified on September 22, 2006. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10033-10044)
9/25/2006:
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 634.
9/27/2006:
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S10243-10275)
9/28/2006:
Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S10354-10432)
9/28/2006:
Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 65 - 34. Record Vote Number: 259. (text: CR S10420-10431)
9/28/2006 7:28pm:
Received in the House.
9/28/2006:
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
9/28/2006 9:08pm:
Held at the desk.
9/29/2006 11:58am:
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1054. (consideration: CR H7925-7951)
9/29/2006 1:09pm:
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H7951)
9/29/2006 2:32pm:
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7959)
9/29/2006 2:47pm:
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 250 - 170 (Roll no. 508). (text: CR H7925-7936)
9/29/2006 2:47pm:
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
9/29/2006:
Cleared for White House.
10/10/2006:
Presented to President.
10/17/2006:
Signed by President.
The following was
Posted by kliljedahl on Wed Oct-18-06 04:02 PM
Edited by kliljedahl on Wed Oct-18-06 04:03 PM:
Reply #3: So take it he signed in 7 days (technically)?
I wonder about the delay in sending it to him.
(Note from Vetzine: So do I.
9/29/2006:
Cleared for White House.
10/10/2006:
Presented to President.
10/17/2006:
Signed by President.
Note that callers in to Alex Jones' show have been stating this same exact thing since Thursday, 10/19/16: A caller stated - I'm paraphrasing some of this, but I did take notes: "Re: HR 6166: Military Commissions Act of 2006: It's not actually law. If Congress is adjourned, the President has to sign it in 10 days for it to become law or it's a pocket veto. The statute to create a law is: If Congress is in session and the President doesn't sign it within 10 days it automatically becomes a law. If Congress is adjourned and the President doesn't sign it within 10 days it is automatically a pocket veto and it does not become a law. Vetzine: I found this posted numerous places online right after the caller said this on Alex's show. Continuing with comments from caller into Alex's show on Thursday, 10/19/06: If we can get this information out to everyone, they'll have to pass this again or it won't be a law / legal. He also stated he got this information from http://congress.gov
End of note from Vetzine.)
Posted by illiteratepresident
Wed Oct-18-06 04:28 PM
In response to Reply #3
Reply #4: Buying time
to get some coverage and squelch the Foley aftermath
Posted by mberst Wed Oct-18-06 04:31 PM
In response to Reply #3
Reply #5:timing
My guess is that they wanted to rush it into law in Congress, get back to campaigning, but they wanted the president to sign it as close to the election as he could for maximum propaganda effect.
They don't care about rules or laws or the Constitution or any of that stuff anyway.
The above came from Progressive Independent. Click here.
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=46719#top
Permalink: Click here.
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=46719&mesg_id=46719
How Our Laws Are Made
Revised and Updated by Charles W. Johnson
Parliamentarian, United States House of Representatives
Presented by Mr. Ney
June 30, 2003
How Our Laws Are Made
Click here.
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/lawsmade.toc.html
View completed document titled
How Our Laws Are Made PDF: How Our Laws Are Made
PDF: http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/howourlawsaremade.pdf
More to come on this asap. Vetzine
posted by Vetzine
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Video Shows Which Senators Voted Yes For Torture, Terror, & Rape of Our Rights
Warning! This video is very explicit and contains acts of violence, torture, and nudity!
Parental Discretion is advised!
Click here to watch.
See the lists below of the Senators and Representatives who voted yes to this horrifying new legislation titled The Military Commissions Act of 2006.
This is an older article, but it shows just one small piece of the horrors these people are being subjected to. Please keep them in your thoughts.
Forced Nudity of Iraqi Prisoners Is Seen as a Pervasive Pattern, Not Isolated Incidents
By KATE ZERNIKE and DAVID ROHDE
Published: June 8, 2004
Nudity is considered particularly shameful in Muslim culture, a violation of religious principles. While nudity as a disciplinary or coercive tool may be especially objectionable to Muslims, they are hardly the only victims of the practice. Soldiers in Nazi Germany paraded naked prisoners in daylight, and human rights groups have documented the use of nudity during conflicts in Egypt, Chile and Turkey, and in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation. Central Intelligence Agency training manuals from the 1960's and 1980's taught the stripping of prisoners as an interrogation tool. Nudity and sexual humiliation have also been reported in American prisons where a number of guards at Abu Ghraib worked in their civilian lives.
Read more here.
http://tinyurl.com/y7xtsv
Senators Voting in Favor of Torture / Military Commissions Act of 2006:
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Carper (D-DE)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR) Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/
H.R. 6166: Military Commissions Act of 2006
Official Title: To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes.
View Members' Votes (roll no. 491):
Ayes: 253 (58%)
Nays: 168 (39%)
Not Voting: 12 (3%)
Required: 1/2
Party Breakdown
Democrat Republican Independent
Aye 34 218 0
Nay 160 7 1
Absent 7 5 0
View Members' Votes
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-491
House Vote 491: Sep 27, 2006 (109th Congress)
H.R. 6166: Military Commissions Act of 2006
(Vote On Passage)
Passed: On Passage: H R 6166 Military Commissions Act
Related Bill: H.R. 6166: Military Commissions Act of 2006
Sep 27, 2006: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by roll call vote. The totals were: 253 Ayes, 168 Nays, 12 Present/Not Voting.
See related bills:
(Related bill):
H. Res. 1042:
Official Title: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6166) to amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes.
Status: Passed House (98% of Republicans supporting, 99% of Democrats opposing.)
This resolution has been passed in the House, which is the end of the legislative process for simple resolutions. The resolution now takes effect.
Introduced: Sep 26, 2006
Last Action: Sep 27, 2006: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 222 - 194 (Roll no. 489).
Sponsor: Rep. Tom Cole [R-OK](no cosponsors)
Cosponsors
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.
Full Text:
Text:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr109-1042
or PDF
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/hr/hr1042.pdf
Votes on Passage
Sep 27, 2006: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by roll call vote.
The totals were: 253 Ayes, 168 Nays, 12 Present/Not Voting.
View Members' Votes (roll no. 491)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-491
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hr109-1042
(Here's another related bill):
H.R. 6054: Military Commissions Act of 2006,
Military Trials for Enemy Combatants bill
Official Title: To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes.
Status: Scheduled for Debate
This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the House as a whole. Although it has been placed on a calendar of business, the order in which bills are considered and voted on is determined by the majority party leadership.
Introduced: Sep 12, 2006
Last Action: Sep 25, 2006: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 409.
Sponsor: Rep. Duncan Hunter [R-CA]show cosponsors (19)
Cosponsors
Rep. John Boehner [R-OH]
Rep. Ken Calvert [R-CA]
Rep. Chris Chocola [R-IN]
Rep. Trent Franks [R-AZ]
Rep. Kay Granger [R-TX]
Rep. Robert Hayes [R-NC]
Rep. Joel Hefley [R-CO]
Rep. John Kline [R-MN]
Rep. Frank LoBiondo [R-NJ]
Rep. Candice Miller [R-MI]
Rep. Jeff Miller [R-FL]
Rep. Jon Porter [R-NV]
Rep. Rick Renzi [R-AZ]
Rep. James Saxton [R-NJ]
Rep. Jean Schmidt [R-OH]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI]
Rep. William Shuster [R-PA]
Rep. John Sweeney [R-NY]
Rep. Addison Wilson [R-SC]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.
Cost: < $1 per American in 2007?
The cost is estimated from a Congressional Budget Office report, by dividing the estimated cost of implementing the legislation by the U.S. population. It is of course just a gross estimate.
Full Text:
Text
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-6054
or PDF
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/h/h6054.pdf
Committee Assignments
This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process where the bill is considered in committee and may undergo significant changes in markup sessions. The bill has been referred to the following committees:
House Armed Services
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?committee=House%20Committee%20on%20Armed%20Services
House Judiciary
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?committee=House%20Committee%20on%20Judiciary
House International Relations
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?committee=House%20Committee%20on%20International%20Relations
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-6054
(Another related bill):
S. 3861: Bringing Terrorists to Justice Act of 2006
Official Title: A bill to facilitate bringing to justice terrorists and other unlawful enemy combatants through full and fair trials by military commissions, and for other purposes.
Status: Scheduled for Debate
This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole. Although it has been placed on a calendar of business, the order in which bills are considered and voted on is determined by the majority party leadership.
Introduced: Sep 6, 2006
Last Action: Sep 13, 2006: Star Print ordered on the bill.
Sponsor: Sen. William Frist [R-TN]show cosponsors (2)
Cosponsors
Sen. James Inhofe [R-OK]
Sen. Mitch McConnell [R-KY]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.
Full Text:
Text
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-3861
or PDF
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/s/s3861.pdf
Committee Assignments
This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process where the bill is considered in committee and may undergo significant changes in markup sessions. The bill has been referred to the following committees:
(None listed as of Tuesday, 10/17/06).
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-3861
(Another related bill):
S. 3886: Terrorist Tracking, Identification,
and Prosecution Act of 2006
Military Trials for Enemy Combatants bill
Official Title: A bill to authorize military commissions to bring terrorists to justice, to strengthen and modernize terrorist surveillance capabilities, and for other purposes.
Other Titles:Military Commissions Act of 2006
National Security Surveillance Act of 2006
Status: Scheduled for Debate
This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole. Although it has been placed on a calendar of business, the order in which bills are considered and voted on is determined by the majority party leadership.
Introduced: Sep 11, 2006
Last Action: Sep 14, 2006: Introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9577-9578)
Sponsor: Sen. William Frist [R-TN]show cosponsors (1)
Cosponsors
Sen. Mitch McConnell [R-KY]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.
Full Text:
Text
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-3886
or PDF
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/s/s3886.pdf
Committee Assignments
This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process where the bill is considered in committee and may undergo significant changes in markup sessions. The bill has been referred to the following committees:
None listed as of Tuesday, 10/17/06
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-3886
(Another related bill):
S. 3901: Military Commissions Act of 2006,
Military Trials for Enemy Combatants bill
Official Title: An original bill to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes.
Status: Scheduled for Debate
This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole. Although it has been placed on a calendar of business, the order in which bills are considered and voted on is determined by the majority party leadership.
Introduced: Sep 14, 2006
Last Action: Sep 14, 2006: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 611.
Sponsor: Sen. John Warner [R-VA](no cosponsors)
Cosponsors
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.
Full Text:
Text
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-3901
or PDF
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/s/s3901.pdf
This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process where the bill is considered in committee and may undergo significant changes in markup sessions. The bill has been referred to the following committees:
Senate Armed Services
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?committee=Senate%20Committee%20on%20Armed%20Services
Committee Assignments
This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process where the bill is considered in committee and may undergo significant changes in markup sessions. The bill has been referred to the following committees:
Senate Armed Services
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?committee=Senate%20Committee%20on%20Armed%20Services
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-3901
S. 3930: Military Commissions Act of 2006
Official Title: A bill to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes.
Status: Sent to President
Having passed in both the House and Senate, this bill now awaits the signature of the President before becoming law.
Introduced: Sep 22, 2006
Last Action: Oct 10, 2006: Presented to President.
Sponsor: Sen. Mitch McConnell [R-KY]
show cosponsors (2)
Cosponsors
Sen. William Frist [R-TN]
Sen. John Warner [R-VA]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.
Full Text:
Text
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-3930
or PDF
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/s/s3930.pdf
Sep 29, 2006: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by roll call vote.
The totals were: 250 Ayes, 170 Nays, 12 Present/Not Voting.
View Members' Votes (roll no. 508)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-508
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-3930
posted by Vetzine
Bush Signs Diabolical Torture Bill - Hitler Would Be So Proud!
Bush Signs Torture Bill; Americans Lose Essential Freedom
George W. Bush got what he wanted, ostensibly as a tool in his unfocused "war on terror": By signing into law the Military Commissions Act of 2006, Bush has made it legal for the C.I.A. to continue operating torture facilities in undisclosed, foreign countries, and for the writ of habeas corpus to be suspended for individuals who are designated "enemy combatants" against the U.S. (Designated by whom? That question remains unanswered.) The law also "establishes military tribunals that would allow some use of evidence obtained by coercion [that is, torture], but would give defendants access to classified evidence being used to convict them." (Reuters)
The provisions of Bush's new torture law mean that Americans have lost the key, constitutional right on which Anglo-American criminal law (and criminal-law procedures in true democracies in general) is founded; that's the basic right of an individual to know why he or she is being apprehended and detained. Now, technically, as in Stalin's Soviet Union, Hitler's Germany, Mao's China or Pol Pot's Cambodia, anyone labeled an "enemy combatant" - again, by whom; by Bush? - can be whisked away and never heard from again. That kind of authority, in the hands of corrupt or untruthful politicians, may or may not be an effective tool in some kind of "war on terror," but it certainly can be a useful tool when it comes to silencing their opponents.
"Officially, the Military Commissions Act protects detainees from blatant abuses during questioning, such as rape, torture and 'cruel and inhuman' treatment, but it does not require that any of them be granted legal counsel....Bush said that it was 'fair, lawful and necessary.'" (Times)
During the bill-signing ceremony yesterday, religious groups protested outside the White House. Demonstrators declared, "Bush is the terrorist" and "Torture is a crime."
Read more here.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=15archive/&entry_id=9952
(Note: There is a lot of disinformation and Bush propaganda / Doublespeak in the following article!
"Harsh Interrogation" is just doublespeak for TORTURE!
(In the George Orwell Tradition of
"War is Peace", "Freedom is Slavery", and "Ignorance is Strength")
Bush Signs Law Authorizing Harsh Interrogation
Oct 17, 2006 — By Steve Holland
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush signed a law on Tuesday authorizing tough interrogation and prosecution of terrorism suspects and took an indirect, election-year swipe at Democrats who opposed the legislation.
Bush, trying to help Republicans maintain control of the U.S. Congress by emphasizing national security, called the Military Commissions Act of 2006 "one of the most important pieces of legislation in the war on terror."
Human rights groups charge that the measure would allow harsh techniques bordering on torture, such as sleep deprivation and induced hypothermia.
In a White House East Room ceremony, Bush praised members of Congress who approved the law over the opposition of the Democratic leadership in both the Senate and House of Representatives.
Much of the new law, which critics say still does not protect detainees' rights and predict will face legal challenge, was negotiated in September after senior Republicans rebelled against Bush's plan.
The new law means Bush can continue a secret CIA program for interrogating terrorism suspects whom he believes have vital information that could thwart a plot against America.
Bush said the law will allow intelligence professionals to question suspects without fear of being sued by them later.
"This bill spells out specific recognizable offenses that would be considered crimes in the handling of detainees so that our men and women who question captured terrorists can perform their duties to the fullest extent of the law," he said.
The White House has refused to describe what techniques will be allowed or banned.
CHALLENGES SEEN
Critics and legal experts have predicted the new law will draw vigorous court challenges and could be struck down for violating rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
They cited provisions that strip foreign suspects of the right to challenge their detentions in U.S. courts and what they described as unfair rules for military trials.
Bush insisted the law complies with the spirit and letter of international agreements. "As I've said before, the United States does not torture. It's against our laws and it's against our values," he said.
The law also establishes military tribunals for terrorism suspects, most of whom are held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The law was prompted by a Supreme Court ruling in June that said Bush lacked legislative authority in setting up his first system of military commissions. Future legal battles will likely also end up in the high court.
Shortly after Bush signed the law, the Republican National Committee issued a press releasing headlined, "Democrats would let terrorists free" and listed the names of many House and Senate Democrats who opposed it.
The American Civil Liberties Union expressed outrage, calling the new law "one of the worst civil liberties measures ever enacted in American history."
"Nothing separates America more from our enemies than our commitment to fairness and the rule of law, but the bill signed today is an historic break because it turns Guantanamo Bay and other U.S. facilities into legal no-man's-lands," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2577220
Note that this article is also full of disinformation:
Bush Signs Law Authorizing Harsh Interrogation
BBC | October 17, 2006
President George W Bush has signed into law a bill that sets standards for the interrogation and prosecution of terror suspects held by the US.
This follows a Supreme Court ruling in June that military tribunals set up to prosecute detainees at Guantanamo Bay violated US and international law.
The new law protects defendants from blatant abuse but still restricts their right to challenge their detention.
A US spokesman said preparations would now begin to try Guantanamo suspects.
At a ceremony in Washington, Mr Bush said it was a rare occasion when a president signed a law that he knew would save American lives.
"It is one of the most important pieces of legislations in the war on terror," he said.
He said the Central Intelligence Agency's programme of questioning terror suspects had proved invaluable, and the new law would reinforce this.
The Military Commissions Act, he said, would allow the CIA "to continue to question terrorists and save lives", adding that "it complies with the spirit and letter of the US's international obligations".
The law also set out a system of special tribunals, which would give defendants a fair trial, Mr Bush said.
Speaking earlier, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the trials would not happen "overnight" because it was important "to make sure that the defence is going to be able to do its job properly and the prosecution the same".
He predicted it would take a month or two to "get things moving towards a trial phase" for some of those held at the US detention centre in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Interrogation techniques
The legislation was passed by both houses of Congress in September after intense debate.
The bill forbids treatment of detainees that would constitute war crimes - such as torture, rape and biological experiments - but gives the president the authority to decide which other techniques interrogators can use.
The law does not require that detainees be granted legal representation. It also bars non-US citizens from filing habeas corpus petitions challenging their detentions in federal court.
Civil liberties groups say the law does still not guarantee detainees' rights, and legal challenges are to be expected.
The US defence department has laid charges against 10 detainees and is preparing to charge about 65 more.
There are about 450 detainees at Guantanamo, according to the Bush administration.
http://infowars.com/articles/ps/terror_laws_bush_signs_law_authorizing_harsh_interrogations.htm
Google Search Results 1 - 10 of about 501 for Military-Commissions-Act-of-2006
(Note: This link will always show the most up to date news articles, no matter when clicked on):
http://tinyurl.com/yh34u9
posted by Vetzine
|
|
