Astonishing

One of the principle ways in which the right portrays itself is as being on the side of straight-talking plain folks. An argument that I heard in support of both Mike Harris and Stephen Harper goes roughly, "you may dislike the guy, but he did what he said he would." Ahh, but here is tonic for those of you who tire of hearing of the plainspoken right vs. the fork-tongued left paradigm:

Specter: Now wait a minute, wait a minute. The Constitution says you can't take [habeas corpus] away except in the case of invasion or rebellion. Doesn't that mean you have the right of habeas corpus?

Gonzales: I meant by that comment that the Constitution doesn't say that every individual in the United States or every citizen has or is assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn't say that. It simply says that the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended.

Wow. What a douche. So habeas corpus exists independently of whether or not it applies to the citizenry? At what point did Jose Padilla lose his right of habeas corpus, and by what authority, can it be suspended for anyone else? When stuff like this happens to Americans, is it any wonder that this same government would rush to torture someone like Arar? (H/T Andrew Sullivan)
Picture: Franz Kafka wrote fiction, not a manual documenting best practices in criminal justice, in case you were wondering, Alberto Gonzales.

Tags: torture, human rights, habeas corpus, Jose Padilla, Maher Arar, Andrew Sullivan