Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   Outraged by the SCOTUS ruling on the Gitmo tribunals, Senate Republicans vow to amend Constitution to strip it of habeas corpus   (dailykos.com) divider line 1009
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

21203 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Jun 2008 at 11:09 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1009 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-06-13 12:51:42 AM  
Here's one good thing that's happened in the last 7 years: We've had all the traitors to democracy and human rights step out into the light of day, all at the same time. Now we know who needs to be removed and/or put on trial.
 
2008-06-13 12:52:24 AM  
Bloody William: It's like retarded Judo.

You know, I've been debating it all night, but now "retarded Judo" put it over the top.

You've won yourself a TF Sponsorship.

Even if you are from Jersey.
 
2008-06-13 12:52:41 AM  
WhyteRaven74: Go read the Geneva Conventions on POW's. If they're not being held under the terms of that, which they aren't. Then they have to be covered by US law. It's one or the other, there is no option C.

The Gitmo detainees are being held in accordance with Article 5 of Geneva Convention IV:

Where, in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.

Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity, and in case of trial [ie, trial is not necessary, but if there is a trial then the following applies], shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.
 
2008-06-13 12:52:43 AM  
Noam Chimpsky: The Constitution wasn't written to benefit your beloved throat cutting al qaeda foreigner types.

I know it's trite at this point, but how do we know that the guys at Gitmo are throat cutting al qaeda foreigner types?
 
2008-06-13 12:52:45 AM  
tjfly: Citizenship is also a prerequisite for voting under the 15th and 19th Amendments as for election to Congress or the Presidency.

And yet it isn't a preequisite for habeas corpus, nor for the protections afforded by the 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments.

Since you like quotes so much, here's a quote for you.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.

When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
 
2008-06-13 12:53:06 AM  
glenlivid: Here's one good thing that's happened in the last 7 years: We've had all the traitors to democracy and human rights step out into the light of day, all at the same time. Now we know who needs to be removed and/or put on trial.

Yep. But we have to let them think they have a chance with Obama and the elections and all just a little bit longer. By the time they see the ruse, the noose will have tightened around their necks.
 
2008-06-13 12:53:12 AM  
fuzzycuffs: I propose a constitutional amendment to say this guys is a douchenozzle.


www.protectourusa.com

He looks like a middle-aged Maculey Culkin with down syndrome.
 
2008-06-13 12:53:21 AM  
fuzzycuffs: I propose a constitutional amendment to say this guys is a douchenozzle.

Why is he smiling like that? Did he just find out that he will be able to get married in California on the 16th?
 
2008-06-13 12:53:21 AM  
1-RocketMan-1:Sorry, I forgot. To a leftist, there are no POW's at Guantanamo Bay, just common criminals who should be treated the same way we treat people who commit petty theft.

Yes, they should be treated the same way we treat people who commit petty theft. And larceny. And grand theft. And child molestation. And rape. And murder. It's our legal system. For crimes of this nature, it's incredibly effective so long as its rules are followed. Rules like "don't throw people in jail without giving them access to counsel" and "allow people awaiting trial to hear the crimes of which they are accused" and "allow people to have a trial".

Bush and his ilk want none of these things. They want to tighten their grip on the reigns of power and keep the Treasury money flowing to their cronies. The easiest way to do that is to keep suspected terrorists bottled up in legal limbo. That's far easier than actually, y'know, investigating the alleged criminals and trying them in a court of law. That's all that GTMO and the MCA have ever been about. I'm proud (though scared about the 5-4 margin) of the SCOTUS today.
 
2008-06-13 12:53:24 AM  
I'm glad I live in Mexico.
 
2008-06-13 12:54:01 AM  
TheShavingofOccam123: Tell that to Dick Cheney who famously said: "WE WILL PROBABLY IN THIS PERIOD, HAVE TO BE A COUNTRY RULED BY MEN RATHER THAN LAWS."

img1.picturewizard.com

/sounds more like good 'ol dick
 
2008-06-13 12:54:03 AM  
Cheers and thanks to EZ1923, who sponsored me for TF!

EZ, if you're ever in NYC, I'm buying you a beer.
 
2008-06-13 12:54:08 AM  
andyfromfl: because I didn't know :

The kicker? He did it twice.
 
2008-06-13 12:54:13 AM  
"Today I trolled a patriot by espousing the tenets of fascism. I am so proud"

i242.photobucket.com
 
2008-06-13 12:54:46 AM  
Alien Robot: The Gitmo detainees are being held in accordance with Article 5 of Geneva Convention IV:

I seem to recall there is something in the Geneva Convention about torture, and something else about the detainees being returned to their countries of origin once the conflict ends.

But I guess depending on what your definition of the word "is" is, the above might not be applicable.
 
2008-06-13 12:55:04 AM  
FightDirector: No offense, but I'm willing to give up a free beer if it means that some stupid interns don't detonate 20lbs of Pyrodex while I'm laying detcord.

www.quirkcollective.com

"Where's FightDirector,, son?"
"BLOWN UP, SIR!"
Chorus: "BLOWN UP, SIR!!"
 
2008-06-13 12:55:21 AM  
EZ1923: Bloody William: It's like retarded Judo.

You know, I've been debating it all night, but now "retarded Judo" put it over the top.

You've won yourself a TF Sponsorship.

Even if you are from Jersey.


Hey, Jersey City. Hudson County! I can see the Empire State Building from my window! It's practically a borough. I mean, if Staten Island counts...

/Hooray for the PATH, and the creepy shuttle bus through the Holland Tunnel.
//Also hooray because Jersey City isn't Newark or Trenton.
 
2008-06-13 12:55:23 AM  
MR_DING: What a crock. What's going on is nothing new. You think the Nazis complied? You think the Russians complied? Do you think we complied?

Nope, you're wrong. It is completely new. Your examples, the Russians, the Germans, the US, we all practiced total warfare without regard for civilian casualties in legitimate military target areas, fully in compliance with the rules of the Geneva Convention. But it was total all inclusive warfare, intent of destroying the enemy's ability to continue fighting without regard for collateral damage.

This is completely different because we are not practicing total warfare. We are trying to fight a enemy hidden in the population, while trying to minimize civilian loss and preserve the infrastructure of the country, which is the combat zone.

If we did this like your WW2 examples, the war would have been over in two weeks, if that long, and our soldiers home. In fact, at any point in time, today even, the war could be over in a matter of days.

There just won't be any Iraq left. This war is dragging out because we are trying not to destroy the country. Unlike what we were trying to do to Germany in WW2.
 
2008-06-13 12:55:25 AM  
FarkingSean: FAIL subby.

Do you realize that now we will have to tell prisoners of war what intelligence we have - ALL of it - that led to them being captured, and if we lose in court, they get released, and take that intelligence back to the enemy? This is absolutely STUPID, and it's a knee-jerk, nuclear solution to the Gitmo question. Unfortunately, Gitmo isn't the only thing at stake here, it's our soldiers ability to do their job in combat.



For the last time they are NOT POWs... if they where they would be covered in the Geneva Convention.... and treated nicer.... and released/repatriated.. after..... hostilities........ ended??? wait isn't this an infantile infinite war? Aww who the fark am I kidding, Im just pissed off that we have to even squabble over this shiat in the first place...

/Why are we there again?
// are you guys feel'n any safer yet?
/// RIP to the 4k+ regardless.....
 
2008-06-13 12:55:44 AM  
www.garon.ch

Can already predict the next move:
Convert a cargo ship into a floating detention facility; a huge prison barge.

/kind of obvious, really
 
2008-06-13 12:56:28 AM  
"Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!"
-- Samuel Adams

Crouch and lick, Scalia. Crouch and lick.
 
2008-06-13 12:56:36 AM  
Bloody William: //Also hooray because Jersey City isn't Newark or Trenton.

Fair enough. I took the train through Trenton once.

Once.
 
2008-06-13 12:57:36 AM  
vsync: FarkingSean: This is a dark, dark day for America, and as Scalia said, we will live to see many more Americans die as a result of this ruling.

What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!


Quoted for emphasis. That speech gave me chills the first time I read it. Should be mandatory reading in our schools.
 
2008-06-13 12:57:38 AM  
EZ1923: Bloody William: //Also hooray because Jersey City isn't Newark or Trenton.

Fair enough. I took the train through Trenton once.

Once.


I'm fairly certain Fallout was inspired by Trenton. I had to transfer trains there on the way to visit my grandparents in Philly. I was waiting for a Supermutant to leap out at me.
 
2008-06-13 12:57:59 AM  
tjfly: sooo... a proponent of America, I should believe that these people America has deemed dangerous enough to justify locking them up and throwing away the key probably don't deserve to be there??? I find the odds of that highly unlikely.

America hasn't deemed shiat.

You do every citizen of this great nation a terrible disservice by substituting the personal judgement of George Bush for theirs.

Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countryman!
 
2008-06-13 12:58:07 AM  
Can anyone explain this to me more...

http://engineeringlily.blogspot.com/2008/06/outrageous-and-i-guarantee-you-wont. html

I summed my understanding up there. Just give me a little more info or maybe some links, I fail at understanding law.
 
2008-06-13 12:58:31 AM  
Oznog: Can already predict the next move:
Convert a cargo ship into a floating detention facility; a huge prison barge.

/kind of obvious, really


Run by Royal Caribbean? 'Cause they've kinda got that schtick down pat...
 
2008-06-13 12:58:32 AM  
Alien Robot: The Gitmo detainees are being held in accordance with Article 5 of Geneva Convention IV:

And yet not one court has agreed with that. Hell military lawyers have disagreed with that.
 
2008-06-13 12:59:42 AM  
archichris: which would enable people to vote what they feel is in their best interest

Sometimes (dare I say, oftentimes) what is in the best interest of individuals, is not in the best interest of the country, or what is morally right.

At one time, we got the vast majority of the people of this country to agree that owning slaves was fine and that liquor should be illegal.
 
2008-06-13 12:59:51 AM  
KrispyKringle: ...and something else about the detainees being returned to their countries of origin once the conflict ends.

That's the beauty of it: The War on Terror will never end, so any "enemy combatants" that are detained never have to be released.

Or at least that's what they were hoping.
 
2008-06-13 01:00:01 AM  
vsync: Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countryman!

Only the hands?
 
2008-06-13 01:00:21 AM  
Can anyone explain this to me more...

Link (new window)

I hate FARK links....
 
2008-06-13 01:00:39 AM  
Oznog:Can already predict the next move:

Already done, if you believe the watermelon.
 
2008-06-13 01:00:50 AM  
KrispyKringle: I have no idea who "Samsaran" is, but his profile is pretty amusing, even if it is satire. The below cracked me up:

That sounds close enough to another profile I've seen that I'm pretty sure Samsaran is an alt, now. I don't remember which one, but the wording was very similar.
 
2008-06-13 01:01:03 AM  
Link (Jim Webb has fun with Lindsey Graham)
 
2008-06-13 01:02:21 AM  
WhyteRaven74: And yet not one court has agreed with that. Hell military lawyers have disagreed with that.

Who are judges and lawyers and constitutional scholars to question the Limbaughs of the world and the mighty legal minds they represent?

One of these days, these guys are going to realize how thoroughly they've been duped, and I hope for their own sakes that it makes them angry as hell.
 
2008-06-13 01:02:34 AM  
Oznog: Can already predict the next move:
Convert a cargo ship into a floating detention facility; a huge prison barge.

/kind of obvious, really


You really didn't know they were already doing this?
 
2008-06-13 01:02:49 AM  
Oznog: Can already predict the next move:
Convert a cargo ship into a floating detention facility; a huge prison barge.

/kind of obvious, really


Dammit - forgot this.

It doesn't matter - as long as the US authorities are in de facto control of the place in which the detainees are held (like on a ship, for example), they're still entitled to those protections.
 
2008-06-13 01:02:58 AM  
KrispyKringle: Only the hands?

That's what the kids were calling them in those days...
 
2008-06-13 01:02:59 AM  
I just realized that CrouchAndLick would be a great Fark handle.

/or Farky-tag
 
2008-06-13 01:03:20 AM  
Article V of the fourth Geneva Convention:

In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity, and in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.

Not really sure if we're following the whole "treated with humanity" stuff, or if we're considering them to have full rights and priviliges of protected persons, under current conditions.
 
2008-06-13 01:03:29 AM  
boobsrgood: The Constitution only applies to US citizens?

Where do you inbred chicken hawks get your ideas?


WIN

I think mud slinging is unnecessary... Just calling them out on the lack of ... well... their lack..... is enough...
 
2008-06-13 01:03:34 AM  
Bloody William:

DrBenway: xen0blue:

Can I hear this from a non-biased source please so I can actually verify what is being said and done?

Might an article from one of Senator Graham's home state newspapers suffice?

Dude, they biatch even if there are links to video recordings, transcripts, and records stored on government servers.



Generally, yes. The way I see it, though, is that the more objective a source you can provide them with, the more obvious the absurdity of their position becomes should they continue to dispute it. So, given that, I figure I'm just helping to move the process along.
 
2008-06-13 01:03:45 AM  
Now why do you guys expend so much energy insulting me? First, it has no effect on me, that should be obvious by now. Second, it in no way moves the discussion along. Third, more than anything it shows that you have nothing really to say.

So, lets get off personalities and back to the subject at hand.

I am not someone who supports Bush unconditionally. I am a vocal opponent of the Patriot Act. I was as appalled as everyone else over the torture controversy. I think Gitmo has ceased to serve any useful purpose and should be shut down as both Sen. Obama and Sen McCain have pledged to do. However, my views on this decision is in line with the dissenting opinions.

The constitution provides a separation of powers, this separation is a system of checks and balances that prevents any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. It is a wise and practical solution to a thorny problem. The Supreme Court has overstepped its Constitutional bounds by making Habeas Corpus available to prisoners of war for the first time in history. This is NOT the province of the Court. If such a law were needed it would be up to congress to pass such a law. Courts interpret law not make law.

My point, and that of the dissenting justices, which no one has addressed, is that Habeas Corpus only makes sense in the context of a criminal prosecution. It is very simple, if you are accused of a crime you are entitled to know the charges against you and be afforded an opportunity for a fair trial.

I ask again, how does this apply when there is NO CRIME. You are a Taliban fighter, you engage American troops, shots are fired and you are captured. What is your crime? You are a prisoner of war, or, if you are not fighting for a state in uniform you are a "party to the conflict" as defined in Article 3 the Third Geneva Convention Third Geneva Convention or as is more commonly termed in recent court cases an "enemy combatant". Distinguish this from those charged with crimes in a war zone.

My previous post stated the simple fact that Habeas Corpus has never been applied to prisoners of war. Prisoners of war have historically been held for years. There is no need for a trial and in fact trials on non criminal prisoners of war are prohibited by the Conventions, because historically these trials have been "show trials" for propaganda purposes.

The Supreme Court has held that prisoners can petition the Federal Courts for a review of their captivity. I support this due to the confused nature of stateless war. However, to apply Habeas Corpus in a non criminal matter, to prisoners of war makes no good legal sense and the court was wrong.

What is the administration to do with captured enemy fighters? Let them go? Kill them in the field? Of course not. Some sort of a practical solution must be found.
 
2008-06-13 01:03:50 AM  
1-RocketMan-1: You kind of really haven't addressed Bloody William's point: do the detainees' rights fall under the Geneva C. or under Fed criminal code, or US Military code? What system works here? And I'm not even talking about fairness. We can't have x number of souls sitting around indefinitely. Eventually a cause will have to be pro-offered for the detainment of these men and children. How will we determine who needs to be there, how long they need to be there, and what our responsibilities are to them?

And if whatever reason Guantánamo Bay reverts to Cuban authority (the legal status of the base is not an airtight thing), what happens then? Are these guys going to stay with you?
 
2008-06-13 01:03:57 AM  
MentalMoment: Oznog:Can already predict the next move:

Already done, if you believe the watermelon.


d'oh!
 
2008-06-13 01:04:26 AM  
McCaintheUniter: My friends you liberals never cease to amaze me. You want to give known terrorist the same rights that have been faught for by the brave soldiers that are trying to kill everyday. I have said in previous threads that I have faith in the American people. You farkers are really making me start to question this judgement.


This may blow your skull off. The terrorists want to destroy our freedoms, right? Well, if we strip them away by expanding the power of the president to do whatever he wants, haven't we done their job for them?

My friend, this might strip you scull off, but I don't plan on going to Iraq and killing American soldiers like this bunch of terrorist trash


If you actually believe what you're saying, then you would be a terrifying person ever serve in any sort of leadership role.

I considered some rant about the good Patrick Henry and those who think that gutless nationalist militarism can somehow better supplant the roots of Liberty that the US was constructed upon Then I figured that those who would understand a little of what it means to be an American already do and those who do not will not.
 
2008-06-13 01:05:09 AM  
Stick a fork in that lame duck president, he's done.
 
2008-06-13 01:05:27 AM  
boobsrgood: "Today I trolled a patriot by espousing the tenets of fascism. I am so proud"

So that guy in the pic has dual drum magazines for his sidearm? Wow.

/Maybe I'm just mesmerized by his jim-flinger flopping in the breeze
 
2008-06-13 01:05:39 AM  
KrispyKringle: On second thought, this profile is clear satire. He consistently puts "Fark" and "Farker" in all-caps, yet later rants about people who use all-caps.

People who use all caps for their entire posts ... not those who use them for emphasis. That is the accepted use of caps.
 
Displayed 50 of 1009 comments

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report