A little later it says that military tribunals are not subject to the speedy trial rule. So someone can be determined by the executive branch to be an unlawful enemy combatant, someone in America, never have a trial, never go before a combat status review tribunal, never go before a military commission, have none of the rights everybody is talking about, and be held in jail forever. That is wrong.

Secondly, the gentleman who was debating me before said soldiers have never had rights to habeas corpus. Certainly, if you pick up someone on the battlefield with a rifle in his arms, he shouldn't have habeas corpus. But if you pick up somebody in Chicago or New York or Los Angeles, who is to say that person is an unlawful enemy combatant? If you pick up somebody in Chicago or New York and say he is a murderer or a rapist and you want to hold him in jail until you can have a trial, you go before a judge and say, here is our evidence. There is some evidence that he is, in fact, a murderer or rapist to justify keeping him in jail.

Under this, though, you say he is an unlawful enemy combatant and that's that. You never hear from him again. That is against all our traditions. It makes the President a dictator because someone who claims the power to put someone in jail forever, with no hearing, no evidence, and no recourse, is a dictator. And on page 93 of the bill it says that no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain habeas corpus, which is simply a request to say show me why you are holding me in jail, or to entertain any action saying, Hey, you are torturing me, about the condition of confinement. So you can take this person because the President says so, put him in jail, subject him to any torture or whatever, and whatever you write in the law doesn't matter because no court can hear the case. There is no one to bring the complaint before it. That is wrong and it is insupportable.