Innocent until proven guilty! Unless otherwise suspected.

The US government introduced a new law yesterday, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which seems to continue to knock down the ever shaky perception that Americans have basic legal rights that are protected under law.

It’s a legal proceeding that is attracting a bit of attention from liberals in the States, but no great proclamation of concern from the masses, something that is a worrisome trend for a nation that was founded on the principle of equality of all (even if it’s a principle that rarely gets a full hearing it seems).

It’s an act that appears to effectively end the writ of habeas corpus, the court order that mandates that a prisoner be brought forward to determine if he or she has been imprisoned lawfully or whether they should be released from custody.

In the terror stoked era we live in, it seems that now with the new act in place anyone can be declared an enemy combatant and incarcerated indefinitely. Subject to possible torture in the quest for information, denied their right to a speedy trial, a fair trial, or even any trial.

In effect, using the widest net possible to catch those that wish ill will or worse to the nation, but possibly snaring many innocent citizens, trapped in a twilight zone where no rights exist and no redress is available.

The New York Times provided it’s interpretation of and concern over a number of aspects of the legislation, a primer that was published as the act worked it's way through Congress, but seems just as valid today, serving to at least enlighten a nation that appears to be opting out of the debate over their legal rights.

There have been a few others that have sounded alarm bells over the possible misuse of authority; Jack Cafferty on CNN has regularly tried to hold the Administration and the Democrats for that matter to account over the erosion of cherished rights and beliefs.

But by far the most outspoken critic of the George Bush administration and it’s travels down the similar road of the McCarthy era and maybe even further, has been Keith Olbermann who toils away for the little watched MSNBC cable channel in the USA.

Olbermann has become the stone in the shoe of George Bush, frequently taking issue with many of the edicts and proclamations of the Administration. He’s a polar opposite to the talking heads over at Fox, which seem to greet almost every White House press release as scripture to be revered.

Yesterday, Olbermann aired a commentary on the Military Commissions Act of 2006 which took on the issues of the act, suggesting that his nation is in a trance, living in fear. It’s a pretty powerful, if occasionally hyperbolic piece of journalism. But at least someone is speaking out about the path that the Republicans are taking their nation along, highlighting the key aspects of that path that need to be examined.

MSNBC has the story and video on its website, the one byproduct of the internet age is at least instantaneous distribution of opinion, even if it isn’t particularly welcomed from time to time by those in power. Crooks and Liars which has served to try and keep government to account also covered the Olbermann report, for those that may not know that MSNBC exists.

Lest we get to smug on our side of the border, we need only remember that it’s not too hard to find yourself caught up in the vortex of suspicion, banished off to third party states without benefit of a legal proceeding.

It doesn’t happen very often, but that it happens at all should be a cause for vigilance on our side of the border. Should anyone need a refresher course, simply google up Maher Arar’s name, it will remind you of just how fragile freedom can be.

Terror is designed to change our way of life, sew suspicion in the nation and make us less than what we were. These days it would seem that at times, terror is winning out over liberty. We want to be safe, we want those that plan terror to be caught, but at what cost to our way of life will we go.

It’s a fine line between the search for those that truly wish harm and those that just happen to fit a profile. We ask a lot of those that are told to protect us; the job is hard and has little room for error. Is it too much to ask that they get it right, and go about their work on our behalf in a legal and ethical matter?

The erosion of the basic rights that make our societies a beacon for less enlightened parts of the world should not be on the agenda. Laws that provide for hidden trials, never ending incarceration and seem to dispense with the need for evidence, proof of wrongdoing or rebuttal of such don’t serve the cause of liberty particularly well.

The likes of Olbermann, Cafferty and the New York Times are sounding the cautionary alarms, one wonders if anyone wishes to listen anymore.