{"id":183969,"date":"2012-09-20T21:38:00","date_gmt":"2012-09-21T02:38:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2012\/09\/20\/this-almost-makes-me-believe-the-obama-wannabee-dictator-teabagger-crap\/"},"modified":"2012-09-20T21:38:00","modified_gmt":"2012-09-21T02:38:00","slug":"this-almost-makes-me-believe-the-obama-wannabee-dictator-teabagger-crap","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2012\/09\/20\/this-almost-makes-me-believe-the-obama-wannabee-dictator-teabagger-crap\/","title":{"rendered":"This Almost Makes Me Believe the Obama Wannabee Dictator Teabagger Crap"},"content":{"rendered":"

Seriously, whenever the administration gets in front of a judge and argues for unlimited executive power. they sound like they are acting out one of Dick Cheney’s fascist wet dreams<\/a>: <\/p>\n

The Obama administration warned Monday that a judge\u2019s ruling last week blocking a statute authorizing the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects has jeopardized its ability to continue detaining certain prisoners captured during the war in Afghanistan.<\/span>

<\/span>In an emergency appeal of the ruling, the government asserted that United States District Court Judge Katherine B. Forrest went beyond enjoining the statute \u2014 enacted last year as part of the National Defense Authorization Act \u2014 and potentially curtailed detention powers it has been exercising for years under its interpretation of the authorization to use military force against the perpetrators of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.<\/span>

<\/span>Judge Forrest\u2019s order \u201cthreatens irreparable harm to national security and the public interest by injecting added burdens and dangerous confusion into the conduct of military operations abroad during an active armed conflict,\u201d the government wrote in a 38-page filing with the federal appeals court in New York.<\/span>

<\/span>The motion focused on language used by Judge Forrest that rejected interpreting the original use-of-force authorization as including the ability to detain \u201csubstantial supporters\u201d of Al Qaeda and the Taliban, as opposed to people who are actually part of those groups. The judge also called into question the idea that the United States could detain members or supporters of \u201cassociated forces\u201d that had no involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Thankfully, the judge was having none of this:<\/p>\n

\u201cIf, following issuance of this permanent injunctive relief, the government detains individuals under theories of \u2018substantially or directly supporting\u2019 associated forces, as set forth in\u201d the National Defense Authorization Act, \u201cand a contempt action is brought before this court, the government will bear a heavy burden indeed,\u201d she wrote. <\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The interesting thing here is that there are at least two alternatives that come to mind:<\/p>\n