synapse play so hard 60927 Posts user info edit post |
fyi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checks_and_balances 6/30/2006 9:54:40 AM
|
super ben All American 508 Posts user info edit post |
Does he read TWW? 6/30/2006 9:56:22 AM
|
trikk311 All American 2793 Posts user info edit post |
lock 6/30/2006 10:05:48 AM
|
TGD All American 8912 Posts user info edit post |
ibtb 6/30/2006 10:12:17 AM
|
super ben All American 508 Posts user info edit post |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/16/Regular_plastic_bucket.jpg/180px-Regular_plastic_bucket.jpg) 6/30/2006 10:15:12 AM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander_in_chief 6/30/2006 10:46:25 AM
|
sarijoul All American 14208 Posts user info edit post |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/the_war_on_terror_is_such_a_bullshit_war_and_will_probably_never_actually_end
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 10:48 AM. Reason : l] 6/30/2006 10:47:57 AM
|
1CYPHER Suspended 1513 Posts user info edit post |
Good ole Bush got smacked around by some judges. Love it! 6/30/2006 10:55:13 AM
|
synapse play so hard 60927 Posts user info edit post |
why the hell would this get locked? it was supposed to be a serious discussion about our system of checks and balances and how the supreme courts ruling is a perfect example of this system in action.
I find it interesting that everyone suggesting this thread be locked are conservatives.
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 11:08 AM. Reason : ] 6/30/2006 11:06:11 AM
|
trikk311 All American 2793 Posts user info edit post |
lock this crap 6/30/2006 11:13:20 AM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
i didnt think there were any conservatives on TWW 6/30/2006 11:15:22 AM
|
synapse play so hard 60927 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Ruling prompts Bush to press for new laws to try Cuba detainees
THE Bush Administration and senior Republicans will press Congress to pass laws so that Guantanamo Bay detainees, including David Hicks, can be tried by military tribunals that do not offer the same legal rights as US courts or courts martial.
The move comes after the US Supreme Court's landmark ruling that the military commissions set up after September 11, 2001, to try "enemy combatants" contravened the Geneva Convention and the American Military Code of Justice.
Administration officials have made it clear that President George Bush is determined to push ahead with tribunals that offer "terrorist killers and war criminals" less than the protections and rights available at courts martial and in US courts.
The officials said that the court's decision was "narrowly based" and was not a judgement on the limits of presidential powers in war time. But few legal experts agreed with them.
Some Administration officials admitted that the ruling throws into doubt the whole strategy for fighting the so-called war on terror. That includes the CIA prisons where senior al-Qaeda members are held with no access to lawyers, and interrogation techniques approved by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other officials.
Senior Republicans said they would push Congress to pass laws that would allow Mr Bush, in the words of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, "to keep America safe in the war on terror".
But Senate Armed Services Committee chairman John Warner said there would have to be an "acceleration of efforts to return detainees to their own countries".
Mr Bush, clearly stunned by the ruling, said that "to the extent that there is latitude to work with Congress … we will do so".
Senior Democrats responded cautiously to the proposal that Congress should pass laws for military tribunals. But Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said they would not support legislation that failed to take into account the court's ruling.
Some Democrats said that any new laws were likely to be challenged in the courts.
The Supreme Court ruled that Mr Bush had no power to set up the military commissions without Congressional approval and legislation. Additionally, the commissions contravened US and international law.
Military defence lawyers for Guantanamo detainees were jubilant. Major Michael Mori, the military lawyer for David Hicks, said Hicks was always prepared to be tried by a proper court martial or in a federal court.
"Today, the Supreme Court found that the system Australia supports is illegal and fails to provide basic fundamental rights required for a criminal justice system," he said.
The ruling that even al-Qaeda suspects are entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention is likely to have the biggest long-term impact on the Bush Administration. It limits Mr Bush's power to wage the war on terror and may affect other Bush-sanctioned programs, including the phone-tapping operation run by the National Security Agency without court approval.
Andrew McBride, a former federal prosecutor and an Administration supporter, said the decision was a blow for the President. "It takes a very narrow view of the President's authority," he said.
" |
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/ruling-prompts-bush-to-press-for-new-laws-to-try-cuba-detainees/2006/06/30/1151174396035.html 6/30/2006 11:21:42 AM
|
TGD All American 8912 Posts user info edit post |
6/30/2006 11:31:46 AM
|
1CYPHER Suspended 1513 Posts user info edit post |
I guess if you define war any way you want to.... 6/30/2006 11:39:54 AM
|
A Tanzarian drip drip boom 10994 Posts user info edit post |
I find it interesting that, only a few months ago, the Supreme Court was out-of-control conservative after being packed with Alito and Roberts. Now, that same court is being lauded as holding up the system of checks and balances.
I also found it interesting that one of the articles I read mentioned that the three dissenting Justices were nominated by Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II. Yet, the article failed to mentioned that three of the majority Justices were also appointed by Republican Presidents.
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 11:57 AM. Reason : ] 6/30/2006 11:56:39 AM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
you guys do realize that they can still hold all of the Gitmo prisoners for as long as theres still a war going on
the supreme court ruling only has to do with how the prisoners are tried
I hope Bin Laden's bodyguard rots in their for the rest of his life
Quote : | "I guess if you define war any way you want to...." |
im pretty sure its a fairly simple concept that the President of the United States is the Commander in Chief of the military during a time of war
we are at war you know] 6/30/2006 12:00:40 PM
|
1CYPHER Suspended 1513 Posts user info edit post |
I guess if you define war any way you want to.... 6/30/2006 12:09:34 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
i guess if you forget 9/11 because you hate the president... 6/30/2006 12:10:46 PM
|
synapse play so hard 60927 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "you guys do realize that they can still hold all of the Gitmo prisoners for as long as theres still a war going on
the supreme court ruling only has to do with how the prisoners are tried " |
anyone who's read a single article about this decision should be able to deduce that.
Quote : | "I hope Bin Laden's bodyguard rots in their for the rest of his life" |
Don't we all. This decision/process affects many more people than just Osama's driver/bodyguard.
Quote : | "I find it interesting that, only a few months ago, the Supreme Court was out-of-control conservative after being packed with Alito and Roberts. Now, that same court is being lauded as holding up the system of checks and balances." |
Often the rule of law takes precedence over any political affiliations. Thankfully this one of those situations 6/30/2006 12:18:09 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
Congress can vote to essentially ignore the Geneva Convention as far as these detainees
Hopefully they do
Since Al Queda essentially ignores any rules of war or laws governing war 6/30/2006 12:20:10 PM
|
sarijoul All American 14208 Posts user info edit post |
that'd be all well and good if this was a war against al-Qaeda, but it's not. it's a war against an ideology, which is impossible to "win". 6/30/2006 12:22:31 PM
|
1CYPHER Suspended 1513 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Since Al Queda essentially ignores any rules of war or laws governing war " |
Quote : | "that'd be all well and good if this was a war against al-Qaeda, but it's not. it's a war against an ideology, which is impossible to "win"." |
Freaking exactly. Which is why classifying it as a "war" is bullshit so that normal beuracratic processes can be subverted under the "during wartime" veil power the commander in cheif has. 6/30/2006 12:26:03 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
so its not a war? what would you call it then 1CYPHER?
i mean why are so many people bitching about the "unjust war in Iraq" if we're not even at war??? 6/30/2006 12:31:17 PM
|
1CYPHER Suspended 1513 Posts user info edit post |
I'm talking about "the war on terror", not Iraq. 6/30/2006 12:39:53 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
so what would you call the "war" on terror if its not a war 6/30/2006 12:41:28 PM
|
synapse play so hard 60927 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Since Al Queda essentially ignores any rules of war or laws governing war" |
right, because every single person in gitmo is a member of al queda.
war on terror war on drugs hmmm 6/30/2006 12:50:28 PM
|
Scuba Steve All American 6931 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Does he read TWW?" |
6/30/2006 12:52:42 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
^^right because every single prisoner in Gitmo is innocent
and 1CYPHER i'm waiting to see what you would call the war on terror since you dont think its a war 6/30/2006 12:56:11 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
arent they condsidered innocent until proven guilty? 6/30/2006 12:57:33 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
would you consider Usama Bin Ladin's bodyguard as innocent?] 6/30/2006 12:58:11 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
dont answer questions with a question.
by law, arent they considered innocent until proven guilty? if thats the truth, then until guilt is proven, osama's bodyguards are innocent. 6/30/2006 1:01:03 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
i guess osama is innocent too since he hasnt been proven guilty
also "innocent until proven guilty" is a familiar concept of domestic / consitutional law
i dont know how much that applies to international law when our enemies dont follow the rules of war] 6/30/2006 1:01:41 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
by american law, you are correct.
agreed...i dont know how the laws are used with war....but i was orginally talking about the criminals at guantanimo, which as i understand, is under the jurisdiction of american law.
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:04 PM. Reason : df] 6/30/2006 1:03:38 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
so do you personally think osama is innocent?
^i didnt think they were under the jurisdiction of american law since they are not being held on american soil] 6/30/2006 1:04:14 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
of course not, but my opinion doesnt, and shouldnt, matter. 6/30/2006 1:05:46 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
well i personally think the commander in chief's opinion should matter during wartime
and we are at war 6/30/2006 1:07:23 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
http://www.brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=417869
Quote : | "It means that at the very least, the Pentagon will have to set up standard courts martials for detainees, with all the protections afforded by US law. " |
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:08 PM. Reason : df] 6/30/2006 1:08:07 PM
|
jwb9984 All American 14039 Posts user info edit post |
gitmo is american soil, is it not?
and if they are tried, i dont think it would be by some international war tribunal
im pretty sure they would be tried under the american justice system 6/30/2006 1:09:25 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
i believe so....thats why i originally asked the question...im not sure. 6/30/2006 1:10:08 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
Congress can still change that if they want
but the Supreme Court's ruling, to me, will just get Bush and friends to keep the prisoners locked up as long as possible instead of even considering trial until the war is over
Quote : | "gitmo is american soil, is it not?" |
its in Cuba so...
even though its on a US military base, its still in Cuba
but i too am not completely sure about how that works] 6/30/2006 1:10:31 PM
|
jwb9984 All American 14039 Posts user info edit post |
US embassies are in other countries, but on "american soil"
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:12 PM. Reason : .] 6/30/2006 1:11:28 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
if there are still violent conflicts going on that are part of the war on terror
then yes they'll probably just keep them locked up until they die
because they are able to, by law
^do we ship them soil from the continental US] 6/30/2006 1:12:45 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "well i personally think the commander in chief's opinion should matter during wartime " |
apparently the supreme court didnt. ahhh, the joys of checks and balances. 6/30/2006 1:13:08 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
ok well they'll just stay locked up until they die
ahhh the joys of the supreme court not addressing the fact that the gitmo prisoners never have to be released] 6/30/2006 1:14:06 PM
|
jwb9984 All American 14039 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "^do we ship them soil from the continental US" |
be serious dude. NO, its not soil from america.
it's still considered american territory, and i cant see how a military base would be any different
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:15 PM. Reason : .] 6/30/2006 1:14:31 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
sounds like Cuban soil to me 6/30/2006 1:14:57 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
you amaze me more and more everyday. 6/30/2006 1:16:08 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
just because i like our president more than i like our enemies?] 6/30/2006 1:17:05 PM
|
sober46an3 All American 47925 Posts user info edit post |
exactly my point.
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:17 PM. Reason : maybe i should html so no one can see that i edited my post.] 6/30/2006 1:17:33 PM
|
TreeTwista10 Forgetful Jones 148039 Posts user info edit post |
maybe i should hate our president and feel sympathy for our enemies
[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:18 PM. Reason : oh look an edit wow] 6/30/2006 1:18:31 PM
|