At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
I could not believe my ears today when I heard that 5 of our most radical supreme court justices have voted to give Constitutional Rights, to the terrorists.
?????
They opened the door for challenges to be made, in our American Court System, by these
lawless animals, that are intent on killing all of us.
The very bastards that would cut the head off of an American on World Wide TV if they could, can now try to sue our Government, for holding them captive.
How can ANY AMERICAN AGREE WITH THIS?
For that matter, how can anyone, except a terrorist, agree with this?
I really want to hear from you, if you exist!!
How do you think the thousands of American parents, who have lost the lives of their children to these scumbags, feel knowing that their own government now has to allow the terrorists to be treated as an American Citizen?
They have given the very rights, that the soldiers died trying to protect, to the criminals, that had a hand in killing them.
It makes me sick to my stomach, and it very well should.
If you remove the period after Involuntarily, and take into consideration the decision these
numbnutts arrived at, then insert "in gitmo" your statement would be accurate, but still
wrong in principal.
These "rights" have never been granted to prisoners of war, or combatants, in the over 200 years this nation has been in existence.
You need the enemy, if captured, to be locked up, and kept from returning to the battlefield, to kill more American's.
You don't need them to be brought before a judge, with soldiers having to appear to testify to the circumstances surrounding their capture!!
God forbid, that the capturing individuals should be killed or injured before they could testify, in that instance, now we are in the position to allow them to return to the battlefield, and kill some more of our brave young hero's!!
I can't even see how a complete idiot would think that makes perfect sense!
They have been there what, 6 years, and still no verdict? If due process will expidite their punishment, then I am all for it. If they are innocent, let them go. If it's good enough for Mcvey, it's good enough for them. At this rate, they will be executed sooner with the appeals process than under their current military status.
Today the Court strikes down as inadequate the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants. The political branches crafted these procedures amidst an ongoing military conflict, after much careful investigation and thorough debate. The Court rejects them today out of hand, without bothering to say what due process rights the detainees possess, without explaining how the statute fails to vindicate those rights, and before a single petitioner has even attempted to avail himself of the law's operation. And to what effect? The majority merely replaces a review system designed by the people's representatives with a set of shapeless procedures to be defined by federal courts at some future date. One cannot help but think, after surveying the modest practical results of the majority's ambitious opinion, that this decision is not really about the detainees at all, but about control of federal policy regarding enemy combatants.
yes .... judicial review is not an enumerated designation in the Constitution but Justice Marshall decided long ago that it is an implied power of the Judiciary. But ,given that ,it is incumbent on them to act with restraint. The least qualified branch of the government to decide national security matters is the judicary. But this court has taken it upon itself over and over again to strike down decisions about national security not only by the Executive ,but as in this case ,Congress as well. The unelected Black robed Oligarchs are the imperial branch .
The Germany and Japanese men had the legal status of *PRISONER OF WAR*..... we have men held for six years with no legal status....just detainees.
If Bush had wanted or was not afraid to deal with the problem directly, he could have had his rubber stamp congress pass laws pertaining to these "detained", THE CONSTITUTIONALLY LEGAL WAY, but instead, he tried to make an end run around the Constitution thereby increasing his powers.
The part of the law that was overturned yesterday was a law created by Congress in cooperation with the Executive Branch to specifically address concerns that SCOTUS had in another ruling.
Why don't we just cut out the middle men and let the black robed unelected dictators make our laws for us too ?
Perhaps it would've been easier and more expedient to grant them POW status . But to what end ? The war in Afghanistan still goes on . Do you think the loons would be satisfied with them in GITMO still ? No of course not! They'd still be demanding their release and the ACLU lawyers would still be petitioning for habeus status for each and every one of them.
Face it ;this decision is without precedent ;not in US law and not in common law ......or do you think that habeus was extended beyond the British commonwealth by England ?
Linear Mode
