I protest.

Remember Jose Padilla?

He is still, after well over a year, being held in solitary confinement in a Navy brig in North Carolina. While you and I may know about his case, he doesn't. The Village Voice's Nat Hentoff has another article about the situation: "Bush Accused by Lords of the Bar."

As the article says, the majority of the media is ignoring this case completely. This is despite the fact that if it can happen to Padilla, a United States citizen against whom no charges have been filed, it can happen to any of us. As his court-appointed lawyer, Donna Newman, says:

As [his court-appointed lawyer] Donna Newman says, "While the world knows about his case, he does not. They put somebody in a legal black hole.

Padilla has been stripped of his rights — until now guaranteed by the Constitution — by the sole order and authority of George W. Bush, who has designated him an "enemy combatant."

This violates the principle, encoded in the United States Constitution, of habeas corpus. (From that link: "In Brown v. Vasquez, 952 F.2d 1164, 1166 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1778 (1992), the court observed that the Supreme Court has 'recognized the fact that "[t]he writ of habeas corpus is the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action." Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 290-91 (1969). ' Therefore, the writ must be 'administered with the initiative and flexibility essential to insure that miscarriages of justice within its reach are surfaced and corrected.' Harris, 394 U.S. at 291.")

Again from the Village Voice article:

… Quoted was Harold Tyler, a former federal judge, and deputy attorney general under President Gerald Ford, who brought him in to cleanse the Justice Department after Watergate:

"They should charge this man if they've got something against him. And they should give him the right to counsel. These are all constitutional rights. . . . I have been a longtime Republican, but I'm a disenchanted Republican in this case."

The amicus brief he and the other members of the establishment bar signed declares: "Throughout history totalitarian regimes have attempted to justify their acts by designating individuals as 'enemies of the state' who were unworthy of any legal rights or protections. These tactics are no less despicable, and perhaps even more so, when they occur in a country that purports to be governed by the rule of law." And George W. Bush regularly intones his allegiance to "the rule of law."

"George W. Bush regularly intones his allegiance to 'the rule of law.'" George W. Bush is a hypocrite and a liar. He is no more interested in "the rule of law" than is Usama bin Laden, except where that "rule of law" favors Bush and his cronies. Making it not a "rule of law" so much as a tyranny.

You who support Bush and believe him to be the "best President in history" had better carefully consider the case of Jose Padilla with respect to the rights given each and every United States citizen by the Constitution. Then consider whether, in fact, George W. Bush lied when he said:

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Bush lies. Americans die.