Surely this isn't representative of a
Democracy -
(Registration req.)
Under a broad new set of laws criminalizing speech that ridicules the government or its officials, some resurrected verbatim from Saddam Hussein's penal code, roughly a dozen Iraqi journalists have been charged with offending public officials in the past year.
Currently, three journalists for a small newspaper in southeastern Iraq are being tried here for articles last year that accused a provincial governor, local judges and police officials of corruption. The journalists are accused of violating Paragraph 226 of the penal code, which makes anyone who "publicly insults" the government or public officials subject to up to seven years in prison.
cont.
On Sept. 7, the police sealed the offices of Al Arabiya, a Dubai-based satellite news channel, for what the government said was inflammatory reporting. And the Committee to Protect Journalists says that at least three Iraqi journalists have served time in prison for writing articles deemed criminally offensive.
The office of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki has lately refused to speak with news organizations that report on sectarian violence in ways that the government considers inflammatory; some outlets have been shut down.
How long before this type of action meets US soil? Considering that the legislation passed yesterday in the Senate and which is sure to get Bush's signature gives the president essentially unfettered rights (though unconstitutionally) to detain anyone
Those subject to commission trials would be any person "who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents." Proponents say this definition would not apply to U.S. citizens.
The bill would eliminate some rights common in military and civilian courts. For example, the commission would be allowed to consider hearsay evidence so long as a judge determined it was reliable. Hearsay is barred from civilian courts.
Of course proponents of the bill say it will not apply to U.S. citizens. But what does it take to be considered an unlawful combatant? What does it take to determine who meets the criteria for
'any person "who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents'?
Ask a conservative. According to them, it would be the President. Remember inherent authority? Wide-reaching wartime powers? Facing threats before they materialize?
What about that Miami plot?
U.S. Magistrate Judge Ted Bandstra ruled Wednesday that the men in Miami posed too great a risk to the community to be released.
"The charges against each of the defendants are serious charges and constitute counts of violence," Bandstra said, adding that it was "not relevant that the plans appear to be beyond the abilities of the defendants."
The
deeper point?
The activists said the men lacked the financial and organizational capacity to carry out the terrorist plot.
''George Bush's war on terror is now grabbing for straws,'' said Sushma Sheth, a Miami Workers Center spokeswoman. ``The danger of this fear-mongering is that it's making terrorists out of all of us.''
Which is why I pointed out the article about Iraqi journalists being arrested and thrown in jail for speaking critically about the government. There is so much animosity against left-leaning journalist mediums such as the NYTimes and the most common calls are that we are traitors,
terrorist coddlers, or are providing support for terrorists by opposing this war.
How many baby steps are we from actually charging journalists, then bloggers, then vocal dissidents, activist groups, etc, from being labelled dissenters in a time of war and be put under criminal scrutiny and possibly be facing charges?