Comment by juandos

Hamdan Summary — And HUGE News

More importantly, the Court held that Common Article 3 of Geneva aplies as a matter of treaty obligation to the conflict against Al Qaeda. That is the HUGE part of today’s ruling. The commissions are the least of it. This basically resolves the debate about interrogation techniques, because Common Article 3 provides that detained persons “shall in all circumstances be treated humanely,” and that “[t]o this end,” certain specified acts “are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever”—including “cruel treatment and torture,” and “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” This standard, not limited to the restrictions of the due process clause, is much more restrictive than even the McCain Amendment. See my further discussion here.

Comment by Uchuck the Tuchuck

Okay, I’m ignorant, so ya’ll that know better tell what the problem is. According to the final paragraph of the AP story linked in the post:

“Stevens suggested that the administration would be best off trying Hamdan and others before regular military courts-martial trials.”

So why not try their sorry asses in a military court martial?

Comment by MasterGuns

The administration should ignore them and declare the “detainees” to be POWs. Then they will NEVER be released until the President and Congress declare the war is over.
Hold them indefinitely. And start actually treating them like POWs instead of treating them like the “guests” in a minimum security US prison. Let the IRC continue to make their inspections. Deny them any and all legal process. POWs don’t get lawyers.

A plus to declaring them POWs would be that they then fall under US Military Law and would be able to be held accountable for all actions while they are POWs under the UCMJ. They also would be able to be treated EXACTLY under the guidlines set under the Geneva Conventions. That means, among other things, they get fed the same chow that US troops get. MREs 3 times a day sounds like a good idea to me!

Semper Fi

Comment by Emperor Darth Misha I

a. Bureaucratic power struggle - POTUS managed to establish a parallel judicial system, which pisses off significant part of existing one. (Greatly concerns me as well, BTW)

It’s hardly a new concept, though. You simply cannot apply the same rules and protections to war that you use in a peaceful, civilian society. That’s why we have a UCMJ.

c. This might fly over your heads, guys, but if we engage in terror, torture and lawlessness we should be waging WOT on ourselves in order not to be seen as hypocrites.

Only if we engage in flying civilian airliners into office buildings, abducting civilians and sawing their heads off etc. etc.

Unless, of course, you’re suggesting that putting panties on a terrorist suspect’s head is the same as slicing the head off an innocent civilian while ululating ecstatically, in which case further debate on this subject would be utterly futile.

What are we scared of to not try these people by court-martials?

400 public Moussaoui-style parodies of justice, perhaps?

As I see it, the only thing we’re “scared” of is the fact that, in order to prosecute effectively, we’d have to use classified evidence, the dissemination of which would cause us irreparable harm. For the record, that “scares” me too.

That’s why closed military tribunals are the only realistic, responsible alternative to just keeping the terror suspects under lock and key indefinitely.

Comment by AyUaxe

Don’t know why I stoped with Kennedy and Stevens–I meant to include Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer under the “not good enough to be shitheads” category. As an alternative to field executions, I do like the suggestion of MasterGuns. I sure hope Bush or Rummie or someone with some gumption in the administration is reading this blog–better advice here than they’ve gotten to date.

Comment by RobertHuntingdon

Actually I just thought of something. Don’t get me wrong, Scalia had it right. This decision is completely unjustifiable crap. But, as always, the libtards are thinking with their emotions and not their brains. Think things through for a minute. If, as these pustule-brained nincompoops claim, the Geneva Conventions apply to the murdering sandlice, then they just handed us a HUGE “blank check”.

Think it through for a second. Where are these bastards getting captured? In a combat zone. How are they identified? By attacking our troops and/or civilians. Are they wearing uniforms? No.

OK, sum it all up. What does the Geneva Convention define such people as? SPIES who are LIABLE to SUMMARY EXECUTION.

Wohoo!

RH

Comment by rapchat

This was a correct and much needed ruling. What have you been risking your life for? The rule of law. The Bush administration could have set up and administered the whole “enemy combatant” prisoner situation in a way that would satisfy conventional legal guidelines, but instead they purposely choose to set up their own system, one apparently designed to maximize executive authority and exclude any oversight. If they had just been declared POWs from the start, we would not have had this problem. The executive branch has been playing politics and using the war as cover. They are the ones behaving like fascists, this ruling just called them on it. I fear for this country if we get one more “unitary executive” suck up on the supreme court.

Comment by juandos

RatRap (#14) makes the following comment: “The Bush administration could have set up and administered the whole “enemy combatant” prisoner situation in a way that would satisfy conventional legal guidelines, but instead they purposely choose to set up their own system, one apparently designed to maximize executive authority and exclude any oversight. ”

Since when do terrorist towel heads get “American” justice?

The flaming stupidity of your little commentary is almost breath taking…

Do you have ANY idea of what you are talking about?

Comment by rapchat

Or, we could have Scalia, Thomas and Alito grabbed off the street on the grounds that they might be terrorists (those robes COULD be towels). Perhaps four or so years in the legal limbo created by the executive branch for WOT prisoners, where no one is charged with a crime and everyone can be held indefinitely without even being identified (unless Karl Rove thinks it may be politically expedient) would remind them why we have established legal protections, even for prisoners. The Bush administrations obsession with secrecy and executive power has cost this country dearly in the war on terror by undermining trust and support both at home and abroad, and it has driven them to waste time, attention and other resources on attempting to defend failed policies instead of simply solving policy problems when the occur. As a former Reagan Republican, a one time true believer in the cause, its a wonder to me how so many conservatives have come to favor absolute unquestioned power for the president.

Comment by Deathknyte

I like MasterGuns suggestion.

Where are these bastards getting captured? In a combat zone. How are they identified? By attacking our troops and/or civilians. Are they wearing uniforms? No.

OK, sum it all up. What does the Geneva Convention define such people as? SPIES who are LIABLE to SUMMARY EXECUTION.

I thought about it, won’t work. The scum in black robes will declare that we can’t shoot them out of hand becuase it would be “inhumane”.

Perhaps four or so years in the legal limbo created by the executive branch for WOT prisoners, where no one is charged with a crime and everyone can be held indefinitely without even being identified (unless Karl Rove thinks it may be politically expedient) would remind them why we have established legal protections, even for prisoners.

I don’t recall prisoners from either one of the gulf wars being charged with crimes. In fact, I don’t think the US has ever charged a prisoner with a crime other than war crimes.

Terrorists do not deserve the protections of the laws of war. Expecially since they violate them without a second thought. Attacks on a civilian population anyone?

Oh, and if your going to go on about how our troops are killing civilians, its a long way between accidental deaths and intentionally setting a bomb off in a crowded marketplace.

Comment by juandos

Can the following (hat tip to Stop the ACLU) be far from the next challenge for Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsberg and Bryer?

ACLU Against Brain Scans on Suspected Terrorists

Comment by heliumiiv

I don’t see what the big deal is here. From what I understand, the liberaltraitors on the SCOTUS simply ruled that you can’t use military tribunals on the sandlice at gitmo as long as you’re subject to the Geneva convention. This really is a great thing in disguise as a defeat. Maybe now some senators and reps will grow some balls and get us out from under the Geneva convention treaty. Only pussy countries like Fwance are signatory to it anyway. Personally, I think the CIC should just declare the sandlice at gitmo POW’s and keep ‘em there until the end of the WOT, which’ll be never, so they’ll just rot for all time. Serves the bastards right. What’d be even better in my book is if the CIC did away with the SCOTUS entirely, or at least just packed up the liberaltraitor justices and sent ‘em off to gitmo too. I’d like to see how Stevens likes hot Cuban days and nights. Maybe we could also just start scooping liberaltraitors up off the streets and sending ‘em to gitmo too, since they’re just a bunch of ‘queda worshipping wanna-be sandlice. They’d be POW’s too, so we could just keep ‘em there until they got old and died. I really like the argument that ‘queda members are really just spies and can be summarily executed. Do you think we could execute all the liberaltraitors too? I’d really like that.

Comment by Grits

A lot is being said about the Geneva Convention of 1949. but that is not the only document governing the conduct of war. Visit URL: http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/wars/a/loac.htm and learn about the Law of Armed Conflict. It is an interesting 4 pages and damns the terrorists for their methods. Unlawful Ccombatants is very interesting and so is Targeting Personnel and Targeting Objects as well as Distinction.

Grits

Comment by B.C., Imperial Torturer™

Unlike the Gulf war, this is a war with no obvious end,…

For one thing, you mewling moron, the “first” Gulf War never ended. If you had the neural capacity to function as something other than a Meme Parrot™ for the *spit* LefTardian Asshats in Academia™ *spit*, you’d understand that there was never an official “armistice” signed after the “temporary cessation of hostilities“.

…and its taking place in city streets with large civilian populations.

You DO remember a certain Bent-dicked Arkansan Rapist™ lobbing 400+ cruise missiles into the middle of a certain “large civilian population“, don’t you? Jeebus, you guys really should lay off the bongs. That short-term memory loss makes you guys such easy targets for ClueClubbing™.

I have no pity for the terrorists wearing civilian clothes,…

Uh-huh. As shown by your severe case of BusHilterRoveCheneyburtonZionistMilitaryIndustrial Cabal™ delusional rhetoric and your standing up for NON-UNIFORMED ENEMY COMBATANTS & TERRORISTS to be tried in civilian courts, instead of being summarily executed, as per the Geneva Conventions. (Which, BTW, Osama Bin Liner & His Merry Band of Murdering Mooselimb Mutt-fuckers™ AREN’T signatories to.)

…but a war zone is a confusing place,…

We’ll be expecting to see the pics, ASAP, of you protesting for the IMMEDIATE AND UNCONDITIONAL release of the US Marines, who are being held hostage in San Diego, this weekend. After all, “a war zone is a confusing place.”

…and even the Pentagon has stated that up to 20% of the people they have captured have been civilians unrelated to the WOT.

Linkage please? Or did you pull that one out of your ass when you finished re-enacting your favorite scene from Bareback Mountin’?

Some get identified and released,…

Wooohooo! Ratcrap got something right!!! *Releases balloons*

…some rot in a military prison for life because we have not instigated any working system to allow them to protest their imprisonment.

Then proceeds to shit down his leg again. Such a pity.

Since when did FOUR (that’s “4″ for you reading-impaired LibTards out there) FUCKING YEARS get defined as “life“? It’s a HELL of a lot nicer for them to be sitting around, reading the Pedophile Profit’s™ (May Pigs Pee Upon Him) Handy-dandy Kafir Killing Manual For Misfits & Miscreants™ and gaining an average of 30 pounds each, than the 3,000 people murdered by their friends on 9/11. It’s also a HELL of a lot nicer treatment than anyone who’s had the displeasure of being captured by them and had their heads separated from their bodies with a dull sheep-sticker.

It amazes me that so many people have such a raging fear of terrorism they are willing to abandon the principles of fairness and justice that made this country great - I guess terrorism does work!

Those “principles of fairness & justice” go out the window when NON-UNIFORMED 7th Century Savages™ are caught on the battlefield. Actually, they don’t. These fucking sub-human vermin should have been “fairly interrogated” on the spot and then had “justice” delivered in the form of an M-16 round to the back of their heads. After all, that’s “justice” in the world that they inhabit. We’ve got to be sensitive to their “culture” and should “adopt their ways” when we’re in their land. (Actually, that’s even nicer than their treatment of their OWN people, so we’d STILL be on the “high ground”, so to speak.)

In closing, color me fucking bored to tears with your “arguments“, troll.

Emperor, I believe it’s time to requisition a new shipment of trolls. The latest ones have turned out to be truly defective.

F.E.T.E.

Comment by LC HJ Caveman82952

Gotta’ be the Saucer Dudes, RobHgotta’ be the Saucer Dudes, way to crazy to be anybody from Earth….isn’t it?

Comment by LC Wes, Imperial Mohel

It amazes me that so many people have such a raging fear of terrorism they are willing to abandon the principles of fairness and justice that made this country great - I guess terrorism does work!

Rapchat, I would submit that if anybody in this affair has “abandon(ed) the principles of fairness and justice that made this country great,” it is a five-vote majority of Supreme Court Justices. Consider: In the last two years alone the Supreme Court, all on 5-4 votes:

– effectively destroyed the property rights of ordinary citizens in its Kelo decision, turning everybody who isn’t a millionaire into a potential serf, subject to being kicked off their land at the whim of their masters and betters;

– struck down the death sentence of a particularly brutal killer not because his punishment was unconstutional or his prosecution flawed, but rather because the “consensus opinion” of foreign law deemed the death penalty to be somehow immoral…and thus took precedence over our own Constitution despite the Constitution’s position as the “supreme law of the land;”

– and now - in what would have been a 5-4 decision had Chief Justice Roberts not recused himself - has chosen to arbitrarily rewrite the Geneva Conventions to give all the rights and privileges of uniformed, honorable combatants captured on the battlefield to terrorist thugs who, by their own actions and under the terms of the Geneva Conventions, are considered unlawful enemy combatants liable to summary execution, and not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions.

Let me repeat: In the process of ruling on the Hamdan case, five members of the Supreme Court took it upon themselves to unilaterally alter the terms of an 80-year old treaty solely to benefit head-hacking rapists and murderers who routinely ignore and violate every rule and law of war, morality and sanity… and the Supreme Court itself had to violate the Geneva Conventions to do it.

Also, in denying this President the right to try captured (unlawful!) enemy combatants by military tribunal, these five individuals also casually disregarded over a century and a half of standing constitutional precedents, going back to before the Civil War, allowing the President to order tribunals. Stare decisis, anyone? Or does that only apply to Roe v. Wade?

In the process, they’ve also engaged in what may well be a violation of the constitutional seperation of powers. Article II of the Constitution states unequivocally that the President is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, and making war is the province of the executive branch. No longer, if Hamdan is allowed to stand. Not content with merely second-guessing the President’s conduct in the war on terror with regard to the detainees, the five justices also suggested that the President’s military tribunals were unlawful because - again, ignoring long-established Constitutional precedents - the current Congress had not authorized the President to conduct them. This gives us the specter of a President - this one, or certainly a future POTUS - unable to carry out his duties as Commander-in-Chief to prosecute a war, because he’s fighting 535 would-be CINCs in Congress…and, of course, five activist judges sticking their own oars into the mess, as well.

Having given us a constitutional crisis due to their own disregard of the Constitution, the same five arrogant would-be emperors in black robes now dare to claim that the President is guilty of overstepping his boundaries. I’m sorry, but that’s bullshit.

Comment by TPCrasher78

Emporer, don’t surrender. In fact, this ruling ought to be a larger call to arms to rage against these black robes of death. This is the time we go out fighting, if it’s indeed the end, or this is the turning point where enough Americans say Enough is Enough and pay the Supreme Court a nice friendly visit, complete with pitch forks and torches.

The next time a terrorist is let off and kills again, our judges should be held responsible. Them and the Douche Bag Defense Lawyers of the Ass Crack Lickers Union or Allah’s Crack Licking Union…..