ARS on Twitter
RSS
Time for the grown ups to take control
Posted by Raven on June 30th, 2006
Talk about having sympathy for the devil. The SCOTUS tells terrorists they cannot be held accountable for their plans and plots and evil doings. They cannot be subjected to our torturous system of military tribunals.
Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, said a pending military tribunal for Yemeni national Salim Ahmed Hamdan, chauffeur to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, could not proceed because its structure and procedures violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice and four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949.
Why not??
“It is not evident why the danger posed by international terrorism, considerable though it is, should require, in the case of Hamdan’s trial, any variance from the courts-martial rules,” he said.
Really now. September 11th ring a bell here??
Justice Scalia, writing the minority opinion, said Congress enacted the Detainee Treatment Act on Dec. 30 that “unambiguously provides” that no court, justice or judge has the jurisdiction to consider a petition on whether Guantanamo detainees were imprisoned lawfully and whether they should be released from custody.
“Notwithstanding this plain directive, the court today concludes that … every ‘court, justice or judge’ before whom such a habeas application was pending on Dec. 30 has jurisdiction to hear, consider and render judgment on it,” Justice Scalia said. “This conclusion is patently erroneous.”
Well we see your peers on the bench don’t all agree. But the majority of American people agree with Justice Scalia.
Justice Thomas read parts of his dissent from the bench, something he has not done in 15 years on the high court.
“The judgment of the political branches that Hamdan, and others like him, must be held accountable before military commissions for their involvement with and membership in an unlawful organization dedicated to inflicting massive civilian casualties is supported by virtually every relevant authority,” he said.“We are not engaged in a traditional battle with a nation-state, but with a worldwide, hydra-headed enemy, who lurks in the shadows conspiring to reproduce the atrocities of September 11, 2001, and who has boasted of sending suicide bombers into civilian gatherings, has proudly distributed videotapes of beheadings of civilian workers, and has tortured and dismembered captured American soldiers.”
Exactly. The enemy is the devil hiding under the umbrella known as Islam. They will stop at nothing to kill as many freedom loving people. Many of these enemies are mere foot soldiers, who reside at Gitmo. Let’s just set them free…
In a joint statement, Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Jon Kyl of Arizona said they were “disappointed” with the ruling, although they think problems cited by the court “can and should be fixed.”
“It is inappropriate to try terrorists in civilian courts. It threatens our national security and places the safety of jurors in danger. For those reasons and others, we believe terrorists should be tried before military commissions,” they said.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said legislation giving Mr. Bush the needed authority will be proposed, as Republicans noted that Justice Breyer wrote that nothing prevented the president from returning to Congress as a remedy.
Nothing needs to be fixed- the crybaby spasm inflicted liberals want to be appeased here. So be it. They’ve had their temper tantrum and now it’s time for the grown ups to take control again. Congress will give the President whatever he needs to keep these slimeball terrorists off ANY streets. The sooner the better. Meanwhile, let’s not take any prisoners. Like it’s said here, kill’em on the battlefront.
June 30th, 2006 at 7:49 am
What the hell is wrong with SCOTUS? Have some of those old guys completely forgotten what happened on 9/11?:evil:
June 30th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
9/11, 9/11 NINE ELEVEN!
Did I mention 9/11?
And so that’s why America needs to give up everything that makes it distinct and different from every third rate dictatorship in the world?
I’m sure you never heard of it (surprise, surprise) but early on in the afghan mission, they were offering 5000 dollars a head for anyone they could deliver and claim was a terrorist.
I’d say it’s more than likely a good number of people who had absolutely nothing to do with Al Quaida were picked up and shipped off to Gitmo.
There are only a few steps to turn a democracy into fascism, and trivialization of the judicial branch, and elimination of fair trial rights are a pretty big one.
You people make me sick. You don’t even realize the kind of injustice you argue for. The courts didn’t betray American values, you did.
I hope that the implication also made in SCOTUS case (that detainees are subject to the protections under common article 3 of the geneva conventions) causes Bush, Gonzales, Yoo, and everyone else who argued for and implemented policies of torture to be tried as war criminals. It’s what they deserve.
June 30th, 2006 at 9:17 pm
No Timmah, we’re just gonna set the detainees loose.
Into Canada and Germany and Britain where the governments of said nations DON’T want them. Hmm. I wonder why not.
American government is for American people you fucking nutard. Not for every terrorists who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The Geneva conventions suck because they allow criminals to have rights they do not deserve. Remember these are the people who will cut your genitals off and stuff them up your ass and laugh…cut your head off
and drag what’s left of you around the city. I’m sorry. I don’t deserve that. Neither do you.
Why do you insist upon treating these scums with “dignity” and “respect” and allow them rights????
Fair trial? Why are military tribunals unfair? Come on, tell me. Let’s hear it.
You’re a fucking leftard and a half Timmah. You’re blind to the cruelty of these people. And you’re blindness is exactly what they want.
June 30th, 2006 at 10:04 pm
Wow….Raven? What have I told you about putting out the tard bait?
I told you that stuff works well.
Timmah, you drooling dope fiend, must I point out that holding enemy combatants is not the hallmark of a fascist society? No, fascism is things like the government telling business where it is going to stick it’s money when it has no business doing so, as in the Maryland Wal Mart Health Care Theft Law.
The GC doesn’t apply to these guys, as they weren’t members in uniform of a recognized opposing force.
If the court wishes to say they are covered under the GC, then they just became POWs and can be held until the end of the conflict.
Actually I kinda like that idea.
As for trivializing the judicial branch?
What the hell are you smoki….never mind toker, just let me reiterate that the fucking judicial branch has pretty much been making law by twisting the interpretations for many years now. But I don’t expect you to be able to see that through the haze that probably envelopes your head every one of your waking hours.
Lastly, and I will type reeeaalll sslllooooooww so you can understand;
people
that
are
not
citizens
of
this
country
do
NOT
have
the
protections
(that last one was a big word…sorry..still with us?)
of
our
laws
period
Only the deft twisting by the judicial branch at teh behest of the aclu and other leftist groups have made cretins such as yourself believe that they do.
fuck off asshat.
July 1st, 2006 at 12:18 am
My, look what the cat dragged in. When you’re done with him, Raven, would you mind sending him over to my place? The morons infesting the comments there are a bit — chewed up, to say the very least.
Right. The very moment we decide that the executive and legislative branch DO, indeed, have the powers vested in them by the Constitution and that the third, unelected, branch ISN’T a Politburo with the authority to invent laws by judicial fiat, no counter-argument allowed, we will have sunk to the level of a third rate dictatorship where unelected juntas invent rules that can’t be argued.
Besides, in order to “give up” something, we must have possessed it at some point, no? So you’re basically saying that in the past we’ve always granted Geneva Convention protections to groups specifically not covered by the Geneva Conventions? Interesting.
Now, if you’re quite done with your histrionic fit, proclaiming that military tribunals for terrorists operating outside the laws and customs of war and every single convention or treaty ever thought up in order to protect innocent civilians from the ravages of war is THE END OF AMERICA AS WE KNOW IT!!!, would you mind providing inquiring minds with a few specific examples of what exactly it is that we stood to lose, had it not been for the heroic actions of five activist judges usurping power not belonging to them?
I’m sure you’ve never heard of it but yes, that is indeed common knowledge. Which is why we’re not simply rounding up these illegal combatants and shooting them out of hand, an action that is fully sanctioned by the Hague convention, by the way. You see, we’re actually trying to find out whether they’re guilty of anything before strapping nooses around their necks, evil third rate fascist dictators that we are.
In order to do so, we have to have a trial. You HAVE heard of trials, haven’t you? They’re something that civilized nations go through before deciding if somebody is deserving of punishment. Of course, it’s not exactly easy to have a trial in the traditional sense when most of the evidence is classified, which is why closed military tribunals have been considered as a means of getting on with things.
Of course, now that the Supremes have decided that military tribunals are a no-no because they violate “rights” that terrorists don’t have (but that the Supremes think they OUGHT to have and, since they can’t pass laws, they just make them up instead), we can’t go ahead and try the Gitmo detainees. Sucks for them, since that leaves us with no option but to hold them until the evidence is no longer in need of being kept secret which, again, means “the end of hostilities” or, in this case, “the end of global terrorism.”
That might take a while, but that’s not our problem, that’s the problem of whatever innocent goatherders might still be locked up at Gitmo. We’d love to try them, find them innocent and set them free, but we can’t seem to get permission from the Supremes to try them. Waiting for the Supremes to reach a decision was a MAJOR reason why the detainees have been held for so long without a trial and, thanks to the Supremes, it looks like it’s going to be a much longer while now.
Which means that the Supremes have, in effect, condemned those detainees to being held indefinitely without due process, something you’d normally associate with the third rate dictatorships you mentioned.
There’s really only one step: You just have to make sure that a majority of socialists wins an election.
Declaring ONE branch of government, and an unelected one at that, above all others, however, is a pretty big step too. I don’t suppose that you ever got past “separate” and noted the words “and EQUAL”, did you? Don’t worry. There are at least five “justices” on the Supreme Court who haven’t heard of the concept either.
Funny you should bring up “fair trials”, however. You see, again, thanks to the Supreme Court’s decision, none of those detainees will ever have one now. Unless you’re criminally insane enough to think that we’re going to publish classified material vital to our national security in the three-ring circus of a standard courtroom.
No, the court only betrayed the American value of trying somebody before they die of old age by de facto denying it to every single detainee at Gitmo. Not that it causes me to lose much sleep, they’re all in violation of the Geneva Conventions and could be shot out of hand, but it surprises me to find you so ecstatic about it.
And so your real agenda shines through, much to nobody’s surprise. You don’t really give a good fuck about “American values”, you give even less of a fuck about the Geneva Conventions (remember that the ones you’re defending so vehemently violated every single one of them) and you most certainly don’t give a fuck about the safety and security of our nation and OUR right to go to work in the morning without having to worry about a 757 on short final outside our office windows.
What you really DO care about is that you’ve become so insane with hatred for an administration that you don’t approve of that you’re willing to go to any absurd length to contravene the will of the voters by having the duly elected government of your own country brought up on bogus charges, ANY charges at all.
Well, go on hoping. You can hope in one hand and crap in the other, then let me know which one runs full first.
If the SCOTUS plurality’s ridiculous interpretation of the Geneva Conventions is allowed to stand, the most likely outcome is that we’ll withdraw from them for the very simple reason that remaining a contracting party, under SCOTUS’ interpretation, would make it impossible for us to fight and win this war.
And losing is NOT an option.
July 1st, 2006 at 11:23 am
ouch…….damn timmah……did that hurt? Was that painful?
Just curious because from this side, that smackdown was funny as hell.
But it looked painful.
July 1st, 2006 at 1:27 pm
tick…tick…where’s Timmah??? How come he hasn’t responded??
July 2nd, 2006 at 4:16 am
Maybe because I’m on a three day weekend, and I have a life, and don’t post 20 things a day that consist of cut and paste articles interspersed with one sentence sarcastic and ignorant comments? Maybe…
Anyway, I know you’re all having fun pretending I’m stupid or some sort of drugged out hippy or whatever, but maybe you should stop to think about why you are so afraid of these people that you don’t think they should be afforded the basic legal rights supposedly guaranteed to all men.
I understand how your all shitting your pants over every bump in the night, and the only way to make it better is to kangaroo court every detainee into a death sentence, so you can feel nice and safe again, but I think it’s time a few of you really thought long and hard about the moral implications of some of your positions.
Just because we aren’t technically obligated to do the right thing doesen’t mean we shouldn’t anyway. There was a time that the world used to look at the US as the “good guys”. Ever wonder why that’s changed over the last few years?
July 2nd, 2006 at 4:39 am
A couple of other things, now that I actually read that misha comment.
since they can’t pass laws, they just make them up instead
No kidding, how *dare* the supreme court interpret the law!
Of course, now that the Supremes have decided that military tribunals are a no-no because they violate “rights” that terrorists don’t have
According to you and a minority of judges. Hmmm, I wonder who might know more about how to figure all these hard legal questions out. If only there was some sort of supreme court or something.
If the SCOTUS plurality’s ridiculous interpretation of the Geneva Conventions is allowed to stand, the most likely outcome is that we’ll withdraw from them
Yeah, if eliminating the judicial system won’t save America from becoming a dictatorship, nothing will!
I could go on, but I just thought I’d mention that precedent has been set, and that precedent (straight from the supreme court) implies that detainees are subject to common article 3 of geneva, making Gonzales, Yoo, Bush and the rest complicit in war crimes.
I can’t wait for the trial.