The only thing standing between the United States and a full-blown, codified dictatorship is: the Supreme Court. An Appellate Court has today just handed down its decision, and it seems that the powers given to the President to indefinitely detain without trial are double-plus good. The mainstream media is not reporting widely on the court's decision; after all, they didn't report on the passing of the NDAA 2012, the act that gave the President the power to lock anyone up and throw away the key. If the Supreme Court does not hear an appeal, the President will retain the right to detain anyone without trial until the end of hostilities against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. There is also the possibility that the Supreme Court will rule that suspected terrorists don't have the right to trial by a civilian court. That fear stems from the Court's decision during WWII.
 |
| US citizen; captured on US soil; did not actually commit sabotage; tried by secret military tribunal; executed. |
One little aspect of this whole debacle that has gone largely unmentioned is the precedent of Ex parte Quirin. During WWII, the Nazis shipped over a team of saboteurs to wreak havoc on the US. Among those saboteurs was Herbert Hans Haupt, a US citizen. After the Civil War, the Supreme Court ruled in Ex parte Miligan that trying civilian citizens in military tribunals when civilian courts were operating was unconstitutional. Civilian courts were operating fully in 1942, but FDR wanted the saboteurs dead, and he had undue influence over the Supreme Court. Haupt was executed, with the argument that: "the enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property."
In 1953, Justice Felix Frankfurter described it as: "not a happy precedent." It is not a happy precedent indeed, because if for example a person were to go and "confess" that they are a saboteur working for the Taliban, then that means that they have lost all of their civilian rights. There is also the possibility that the United States is already conducting or plans to conduct secret military tribunals.
Let's take for example the case of Michael Hastings, a man who went against a US general during our current times of hostilities. So far, we have evidence that Hastings' body was cremated against his family's wishes, and that everyone has been ordered to remain silent about the case. We are not meant to know what happened to Hastings, but it is evident that either Mercedes needs to order a massive recall, or that the laws of physics conspired to cause that accident.
I am a NATEF-certified mechanic with 4 years of hands-on experience at Alfred E. Smith technical school. I also have extensive knowledge of computer systems and can certify that if an individual were to gain access to the computer terminal of a modern automobile, that he could cause the brakes to malfunction, the accelerator to stop responding, the lights to go off, or the radio to go on full blast. Nearly all car computer systems have only one thing separating a hacker from wreaking havoc: access to the indoor cabin.
During a routine car check-up, software can be installed on a car which can allow it to come under the control of a nefarious agent. Worse, cars with Onstar or similar emergency-calling systems can be accessed by drone. For years now, intelligence agencies have had the capability to remotely sabotage a car, causing the passenger a potentially deadly accident. The likelihood that Hastings was secretly executed is higher than Americans are willing to admit.
