Zis iss Amerika!

...und you vill love it or leave it--permanently, by way of Gitmo. The following WaPo article would scare the Republican out of Barry Goldwater.

White House Proposal Would Expand Authority of Military Courts

A draft Bush administration plan for special military courts seeks to expand the reach and authority of such "commissions" to include trials, for the first time, of people who are not members of al-Qaeda or the Taliban and are not directly involved in acts of international terrorism, according to officials familiar with the proposal.

The plan, which would replace a military trial system ruled illegal by the Supreme Court in June, would also allow the secretary of defense to add crimes at will to those under the military court's jurisdiction. The two provisions would be likely to put more individuals than previously expected before military juries, officials and independent experts said.

Sounds good? Well, it gets even better...

The draft proposed legislation, set to be discussed at two Senate hearings today, is controversial [no Scheisse, Schopenhauer!] inside and outside the administration because defendants would be denied many protections guaranteed by the civilian and traditional military criminal justice systems.

Under the proposed procedures, defendants would lack rights to confront accusers, exclude hearsay accusations, or bar evidence obtained through rough or coercive interrogations. They would not be guaranteed a public or speedy trial and would lack the right to choose their military counsel, who in turn would not be guaranteed equal access to evidence held by prosecutors.

Detainees would also not be guaranteed the right to be present at their own trials, if their absence is deemed necessary to protect national security or individuals.

Brilliant! The Supreme Court rules your Gitmo-esque "military tribunals" unconstitutional, so you get your pissboys in congress to draft legislation creating something even more draconian, something straight out of the "Gulag Archipelago."

"But," you say, "surely such measures could be taken only against islamofascist terrorists and their enablers, right?" Wrong.

The military lawyers nonetheless supported extending the jurisdiction of the commissions to cover those accused of joining or associating with terrorist groups engaged in anti-U.S. hostilities, and of committing or aiding hostile acts by such groups, whether or not they are part of al-Qaeda, two U.S. officials said.

According to many in the Rabid Right, the NY Times did irreparable damage to the GWOT by tipping-off al Qaeda that we were watching their money [duh!]. And John Murtha, not to mention the 12 Democratic congressional leaders who have petitioned Dubya to get our troops out of Iraq, has been accused of "emboldening the enemy" and putting "our troops" in harm's way. Would these activities qualify under the new law as "aiding hostile acts by such groups"?

The money-quote from the article sums up Bushco's legal reasoning:

...the rules would evidently allow the government to tell a prisoner: "We know you're guilty. We can't tell you why, but there's a guy, we can't tell you who, who told us something. We can't tell you what, but you're guilty."

And you thought Kafka was a novelist.

Technorati Tags: Bush, tribunal, Gitmo, Gulag, Stalinist, Kafka, IMPEACH