Scalia Claims Guantanamo Detainees Have No Right to Fair Trial
Scalia Claims Guantanamo Detainees Have No Right to Fair Trial
This week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether the special military commissions created by the Bush administration to try Guantanamo detainees violate national and international law, as human rights groups charge.
But Justice Antonin Scalia doesn’t have to wait for arguments — his mind is already made up. Newsweek reports that in a controversial unpublicized March 8 speech, Scalia “dismissed the idea that the detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions.”
“War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts,” he says on a tape of the talk reviewed by NEWSWEEK. “Give me a break.” Challenged by one audience member about whether the Gitmo detainees don’t have protections under the Geneva or human-rights conventions, Scalia shot back: “If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son and I’m not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it’s crazy.” Scalia was apparently referring to his son Matthew, who served with the U.S. Army in Iraq.
Scalia needs to follow the law and recuse himself from the case, as he did two years ago in a case involving the Pledge of Allegiance. According to Newsweek, some experts doubt whether recusal is warranted since Scalia “didn’t refer directly to this week’s case.” But the statute governing inappropriate judicial speech — Title 28, Section 455 of the U.S. Code — does not require such a reference. It states:
Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
The ball is now in Scalia’s court — he alone decides whether he will rule on the case. A Court spokesperson said he had “no comment.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“I am an originalist, I am a textualist, but I am not a nut.”
March 26th, 2006 at 1:27 pmAntonin Scalia.
I’m a breath mint! I’m a candy!
CERTS
The evil secular humanists at TP are not in church today!!??
March 26th, 2006 at 1:39 pmScalia opted to not recuse himself from deciding on Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force case, right after going on a less “injurious” hunting trip with Dick. And the case was decided in Dick’s favor. Care to guess what Scalia’s decision was? MmmmHmmmmm. Real impartial of you, Scalia.
March 26th, 2006 at 1:41 pm#2- You’re a Floor Wax, you’re a Dessert Topping, you’re a Floor Wax AND a Dessert Topping! Onion Head.
March 26th, 2006 at 1:44 pmThis is the second biggest thing about America that pisses me off – give them a fair trial and let them go
Watch this film its very good , we have been shown the film free on TV in the Uk and it was not horrific for these 3 british guys But for the others only my immagination can tell me what it must be like for them banged up for 4 years, tortured till they pass out , now its tragic
the Un wants it shut down, even Tony Blair wants it shut down, Europe wants them to have a fair tril or let go , the world is watching you,
This is pissing me right off
March 26th, 2006 at 1:52 pmScalia crosses the borders of judicial impartiality far too often.
March 26th, 2006 at 1:55 pmOne should also note Scalia’s “captured on the battlefield” line. Of course, it turns out over 80% of the detainees at Guantanamo were not captured on the battlefield. Most of them were turned over to the US by Pakistani intelligence, who arrested them at various locations in Pakistan. Most of them had never been near a battlefield.
March 26th, 2006 at 1:57 pmWe may have to begin protesting judges if he doesn’t recuse himself. Or is he holding every single prisoner guilty of shooting at his son, and what proof does he have?
March 26th, 2006 at 2:02 pmThe invasion and subsequent war was illegal in the first place. Everything about it, every stage from beginning to now, has been in violation of basic international and human rights law.
“The struggle between the two worlds [Fascism and Democracy] can permit no compromises. It’s either Us or Them!”
March 26th, 2006 at 2:09 pmScalito Mussolini
Address, from Palazzo Venezia balcony
October 27, 1930
And they say the Democrats/Liberals are the activist judges.
The only judge I know of that acts that way was a judge in Orange County, CA, whose son was killed by a drunk driver and used to give every drunk driving case the maximum penalty. They finally had to get rid of her, because the OC jail was full of people doing long sentences for drunk driving and there was no room for murders, rapists and thiefs.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:09 pmThere is no war.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:17 pm[...] ThinkProgress provides a brief and damning explanation of why extreme right-wing Justice Antonin Scalia should recuse himself from a case in the next week which deals with Gitmo Detainees. Essentially Scalia has already said that his mind is made up about the case (he believes detainees have no constitutional rights, and do not have the right to a jury trial). Meanwhile, U.S. Code dictates that in any situation where a judge’s ability to take on a case with impartiality is reasonably questioned, it is his responsibility to recuse himself. Or herself. But you know, Scalia ain’t no lady. ThinkProgress lays out facts (and Scalias recent quotes), which you can read here. Sunday March 26th 2006, 1:24 pm by Arlen Parsa Permalink No Comments so far Leave a comment TrackBack URL Leave a comment [...]
March 26th, 2006 at 2:22 pmScalia has shown time and again he is an activist judge.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:23 pmThis is like Bush saying he wanted to topple Hussein because he tried to kill his daddy once. If these guys can’t look at the bigger picture and take their experiences out of decision making, they shouldn’t be in their positions.
How is it that SCOTUS nominees can get away with stating they won’t discuss anything that may come before the court during their nomination process, but they can make speeches like this claiming they’ve already made up their mind in the weeks before a landmark case is even argued before them?
These guys are totally out of control.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:23 pm“Most of them had never been near a battlefield. ”
Comment by brooksfoe — March 26, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
And how would you know?
“The invasion and subsequent war was illegal in the first place. Everything about it, every stage from beginning to now, has been in violation of basic international and human rights law.
Comment by Simon Bolivar — March 26, 2006 @ 2:09 pm
Once again unsubstantiated BS. Show us the verdict.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:32 pmIf the lefties in the country hadn’t gone amazingly off the deep end over the righties being in charge lately, this would not be a controversial remark. What he said is just plain, simple common sense. Enemy soldiers captured in a theater of war have ZERO US citizenship rights, and therefore have ZERO rights in our domestic court system. End of story.
And if the “enemy soldier” decides NOT to abide by Geneva Convention rules, by not wearing a uniform, by hiding among civilians, by purposely killing civilians, by purposely bombing hospitals and churches, etc., etc., etc., then even a military tribunal is more than he deserves.
Yet somebody thinks this is a legitimate court case? No, it’s a total waste of time and tax money.
Just my opinion.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:34 pm“This is like Bush saying he wanted to topple Hussein because he tried to kill his daddy once. “Comment by DS — March 26, 2006 @ 2:23 pm
Show us where and when President Bush said this.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pmSo #17 Fred I guess to you then its ok for the Enemies of the US to do the same to our soldiers?
March 26th, 2006 at 2:50 pmV: “People should not be afraid of their Government…. Government should be afraid of it’s people”.
Boy are we a long way away from that goal.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:51 pmFred I will also add that gorilla warfare was first introduced at the time of the American Revolution.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:53 pmOh please stop the partisanship. Ginsburg said flatly she supported Roe before being seated even though she may have to rule on it again.
The left’s hypocrisy on the Courts is amazingly misguided and partisan. This single issue could keep Democrats from taking back the senate because middle American knows how hateful Democrats will behave if they oversee a Bush Supreme Court nominee.
March 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmKind of an oxymoron to put “Justice†in front of his name isn’t it?
#20- Wait until the draft is reinstated after the Nov. elections.
(BTW- I saw that movie last night- I think I know what my halloween costume will be.)
Fred, Who are we at war with?
March 26th, 2006 at 3:06 pmBush has people rounded up and detained for years without charge, without counsel, and without family contact. He declares them enemy combatants. He determined their status. Over the years, hundreds have been released with no charges. Nothing. We had rounded up ordinary citizens without cause.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:07 pmNow Scalia says none of them deserve a fair trial — is he justice in a kangaroo court? Why would he deprive them of their “day in court” and to know their charges?
Scalia has over and over again proven himself to be biased and his opinoins to have been predetermined. He has failed to recuse himself in some cases where he has had an interest. He is an example of an activist judge — he is re-interpreting laws unilaterally. He is an anti-American justice; justices can be impeached.
Who was the majority when Ginsburg was nominated? Would that be republican?
This republican talking point is well refuted here:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200505260002
If the Shoe Fits I guess drinking kool aid from a shoe is tasty then.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:09 pmSo, then it was/is okay for the North Vietnamese to keep our soldiers indefinitely?
March 26th, 2006 at 3:09 pm#18 troll
March 26th, 2006 at 3:12 pmGoogle it yourself:
9/27/2002 – Bush said at a political fundraiser in Houston, Texas. “After all this is the guy who tried to kill my dad.”
Nice strawman.
Once again, let’s review:
Terrorists blow up hospitols, schools and marketplaces. They are trying to instill fear through the used of guns and bombs. That is why they are called terrorists. Terroists are criminals and deserve nothing but the death penalty.
The insurgents are the ex-Iraqi Republican Gaurd and Special Republican Gaurd, who want Saddam restored as the ruler. They blow up police stations and infrastructure to keep progress from happening. These are soldiers and should be treated as such.
But, the people in Gitmo a neither terrorists or insurgents. Most never did anything. They are suspected of wanting to do something.
Thought police anybody? Anybody see Minority Report?
March 26th, 2006 at 3:14 pmYou’re being dishonest by not including this in his quote
“And if the “enemy soldier†decides NOT to abide by Geneva Convention rules, by not wearing a uniform, by hiding among civilians, by purposely killing civilians, by purposely bombing hospitals and churches, etc., etc., etc., then even a military tribunal is more than he deserves.
Yet somebody thinks this is a legitimate court case? No, it’s a total waste of time and tax money.
Just my opinion. ”
Comment by Fred Farkle — March 26, 2006 @ 2:34 pm
March 26th, 2006 at 3:16 pm“But, the people in Gitmo a neither terrorists or insurgents. Most never did anything.”
Comment by Spudge_Boy — March 26, 2006 @ 3:14 pm
You have proof of this Boy?
March 26th, 2006 at 3:18 pmSilly little troll. That one was covered also. We don’t need to be dishonest. The facts are on our side.
Did you like getting slapped with the ‘Saddam tried to kill my daddy’ quote? I went and got it just for you.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:19 pm
Do you have proof they did do something?
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty, boy.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:20 pmThey were just in their homes playing patty cake with the other children when wammo in came the Pakistani military and arrested them. Can you believe it?
March 26th, 2006 at 3:21 pm“What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty, boy”
Not in war Boy.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:23 pmFred Farkle,
March 26th, 2006 at 3:24 pmThere are too many things still undefined in this Christian war against Islam. And Scalia is not the majority voice for Americans. Rational people know American mideast policy creates terror and this so-called “left” problem is a response to a “PNAC” problem that most people aren’t signing up for. No oil for blood. No gulags for oil. No gulags for Jesus.
They were just in their homes playing patty cake with the other children when wammo in came the Pakistani military and arrested them. Can you believe it?
Comment by troll — March 26, 2006 @ 3:21 pm
Pakistani military? Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,…you’re killing me. You DO know they’re riddled with “terrorist lovers”, don’t you? Want the link?
This is more addled tripe, but continue, please.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:25 pmwhy don’t we apply that policy to all laws.. let’s assume they’re guilty because they were arrested…
March 26th, 2006 at 3:26 pmThere is not a war.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:26 pmSo, you are saying that the US has the power to declare war and pre-emptively strike another country that is no threat to us and then can round up their citizens and hold them forever, because somebody thinks that they were going to do something wrong?
Is that what I get from you?
It is a simple yes or no question.
Idiot.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:30 pm“The insurgents are the ex-Iraqi Republican Gaurd and Special Republican Gaurd,…”
Comment by Spudge_Boy — March 26, 2006 @ 3:14 pm
ex being operative word here boy.
“The insurgents are the ex-Iraqi Republican Gaurd and Special Republican Gaurd,…”
Comment by Spudge_Boy — March 26, 2006 @ 3:14 pm
You have proof of this boy?
March 26th, 2006 at 3:33 pmGive him a minute Spudge, he has to apply ointment to that raw spot on his monkey ass we just gave him.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:33 pmYou have proof of this boy?
Comment by troll — March 26, 2006 @ 3:33 pm
Coming from a person who Deep Throat’s Bush’s policy decisions (were you so interested in “proof” when you soiled yourself over “weapons of mass destruction”?), that’s hysterical.
Keep’em coming!
March 26th, 2006 at 3:38 pm“So, you are saying that the US has the power to declare war…?” Comment by Spudge_Boy — March 26, 2006 @ 3:30 pm
Yes
“…and pre-emptively strike another country that is no threat to us…” Comment by Spudge_Boy — March 26, 2006 @ 3:30 pm
NO
“…and then can round up their citizens and hold them forever…” Comment by Spudge_Boy — March 26, 2006 @ 3:30 pm
No but lefty hero FDR did this to Japenese American citizens in WWII and you still think he was ok.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:39 pm#12, I agree. There Is No War.
The fact that the Republican wing of the War Party declares war and the Democratic wing of the same Party agrees does not change the fact that There Is No War. There is no enemy to “fight” unless you define the civilians we are killing while trying to save them as the enemy.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:39 pm#43
Troll, both hands on the keyboard, you’re all over the road!
March 26th, 2006 at 3:43 pmThis is widely known, so you can Google it yourself. I will provide linnks to things people may not know, but for things that are just as clear as the sky being blue, nope.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:50 pmWe are here to FREE! you DAMNIT! you Have No RIGHTS!!
March 26th, 2006 at 3:52 pmWhat FDR did to the Japanese during World War II was an outrage and is the same thing Bush is doing, so if you don’t like what FDR did, you should not like what Bush is doing.
By the way, I am not a lefty. I think Bill Clinton did some fucked up shit.
Know thine enemy if you intend to do battle with him.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:52 pmDano
“Other countries of course, bear the same risk. But there’s no doubt his hatred is mainly directed at us after all this is the guy who tried to kill my dad.”
Does not say this is the reason for attacking Irag. Idiot
March 26th, 2006 at 3:52 pmYes, we know and you think Bush never tied 9/11 to Saddam also. The problem is that is not what the rest of the country heard or believes. You are a red marble in a sea of blue marbles. You are insugnificant and irrelevant.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:54 pmOf course, Scalia is also ignoring the fact that most (if not all) of the Guantanamo detainees were not captured on a battlefield – they were rounded up by Afghan warlords to collect large US bounties for turning in terrorists).
March 26th, 2006 at 3:57 pmIf they Disbanded the Million Plus Republican Army Of Saddam and they Dispersed back into the public sector, which they have, then using Scalias Logic the Iraqi People also have no rights?
So Whats the Difference between a Gitmo Iraqi and one that was disbanded from Saddams Army running around Iraq, that many may have voted in the Iraqi elections??
SO According to Scalia the Vietnam POWS should still be in VIETNAM because they also would HAVE NO RIGHTS if SCALIA had been Judge?
WOWOW WOW! thats some sacry Sheeahht
March 26th, 2006 at 3:57 pmNo FDR imprisoned hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans for years and denied them the rights they deserved as US citizens and lefties dont call him fascist.
Bush has imprisoned a few thousand insurgants they are not US citizens nor are they covered by the Geneva convention they can stay there till we are ready to deal with them. Tough crap if you dont like it. You are not in charge and that is not likely to change.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:00 pmYes Afghan also had a bumper crop of opium in 2004.
Yet Blood Cult Chrisitians such as IRI YET are ignorant of their Christian Persian relations;
The Persian civilization spawned four major religions: Zoroastrianism, Mithraism, Manichaeanism, and the Bahá’à Faith. Other religions such as Mazdakism and Manichaenism also arose from ancient Iran, with the former having been dubbed the first communistic ideology, and the latter heavily influencing Saint Augustine; hence, indirectly influencing Christianity: Both religions were sub-branches of Zoroastrianism. Today many scholars while still debating on which religion first introduced monotheism; Zoroastrianism, or Judaism, they, however, have conceded that it was the religion of Zoroastrianism that for the first time introduced angelology, demonology, apocalyptical doctrines, as well as, some eschatological notions to humanity. [13] Such ideas would later be passed on to the Babylonian Jews via the Persian Empire. All of these reflect the dualism of Persian culture which has also significantly influenced Judeo-Christianity and Western civilization. In addition, Persian civilization has affected its neighbors through culture, religion, and language.
Most Persians in Iran are Shia Muslims, while smaller communties of Sunni Muslims, Bahá’Ãs, Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians remain. There are also Persians who are Atheist and Agnostic.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:00 pmYou are not in charge either. You are a number. You are just a single vote that doesn’t count for shit.
You just keep telling yourself that the Republicans will always be in charge.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:02 pmSo using TROLLs’ logic The Vietnamese Should have kept the POW’s as War Booty? And given them No rights?
Well Im sure THAT Scalia would find that a Horrible thing if his SON were a POW in Vietnam. Why?
Because hes a HYPOCRITE!
And then Troll the Jewish People of the Holocaust also had no Rights? Because it was a WAR?
March 26th, 2006 at 4:07 pmWhy TROLL you have gone Past Anti-Semitic straight to Anti-Humanity
March 26th, 2006 at 4:08 pmIf SADDAM were part and parcel of the 9/11 Attacks, do you honestly think Bush would have Allowed him to go Back to Iraq for some Media Circus Show??
I wonder.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:10 pmScalia has a conflict of interest in that it is certain that his son’s military service is an emotional point for him.
There is no way he can decide such a case and cast aside his son’s ordeals, which are probably very real.
Not all judges who have sons/daughters in the military have a conflict emotionally. Scalia has already made it clear that he does.
THAT IS WHY IT IS IRRELEVENT IF HE WAS REFERRING TO THE PENDING CASE. HE MADE CLEAR HE CANNOT MAKE A DECISION ON ANY SUCH CASE THAT IS NOT INFLUENCED BY HIS EMOTIONS.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:11 pm“Why TROLL you have gone Past Anti-Semitic straight to Anti-Humanity”
Comment by Hamster Brain — March 26, 2006 @ 4:08 pm
The tittle Hamster Brain is appropreate.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:25 pmRainman I know it’s appropriate I know know .
March 26th, 2006 at 4:27 pmSo, after getting completely pummeled to shit, troll has to resort to name calling and nothing else in his posts.
Mission Accomplished!
Another One Bites The Dust!
We Are the Champions!
Chump.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:31 pmshame on america a law unto itself – expect the same treatment from others in future –
March 26th, 2006 at 4:34 pm61 James, good retort, not. Its not the emotions that is being questions its his words.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:38 pmSpudgeMAN, an off thread question: What do you think is the appropriate jail sentence for a person convicted of drunk driving? Repeat offenders?
FYI – Both “sets” in your definition of terrorists and insurgents (foreign fighters or Iraqis) are bent on spreading fear and intimidation. Your “attempt” to differentiate is blurring the lines…]
#31 – “And, in discussing the threat posed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, Bush said: “After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad.â€
March 26th, 2006 at 4:40 pmComment by Spudge_MAN
SpudgeMAN, I always wondered why the impotent half of our former President Clinton did NOTHING when presented with evidence of Saddam’s plat to kill GHWB…Another fine example of ALL TALK all the time.
Scalia has a conflict of interest in that it is certain that his son’s military service is an emotional point for him.
Scalia should care more for his family and get them out of iraq
Live by the sword die by the sword – not for my children i have more sense
March 26th, 2006 at 4:42 pmWhat do you think is the appropriate jail sentence for a person convicted of drunk driving?
Comment by mighty aphrodite
Allow me to answer that, aphrodite.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Republicans make them President. Unless, of course, they get two, then they make them the Vice President. As for Saddam’s plot to kill GHWB. Wasn’t it GHWB who started it by trying to take out Saddam in 1991?
Silly girl.
March 26th, 2006 at 4:48 pmHere’s the deal…We progressives reject that it serves our interests to hold some of these guys for eternity. You can nail down any terrorist charges on more than just hearsay, and we don’t mind continuing to hold ‘em.
But some of these guys posed no danger to us. If they no longer pose a threat to us and don’t have any intel, let ‘em go home. I mean, why keep the poor schmoe any longer than you have to.
Lastly, if we’re going to hold them as captured enemy combatants, then the full force of the Geneva Convention should hold. Why, you bushies ask? Self interest, that’s why. If our boys get caught, I want them to be held to the same Geneva Conventions standards. Just cause some opponents don’t follow them, is no reason to sell our own souls down the river. Didn’t your mama ever tell you “If everybody was jumping off high cliffs, would you do it?”. Well, didn’t she?
That’s my point. We treat them properly because that’s what is right. It’s important to do and be seen as doing the right thing, not only by others, but more importantly, by ourselves.
March 26th, 2006 at 5:00 pmFred I will also add that gorilla warfare was first introduced at the time of the American Revolution.
Comment by theroachman
“Gorilla warfare” does that have something to do with apes fighting, or do you mean “guerilla warfare?
March 26th, 2006 at 5:12 pmJoe “Squirrel” Sixpack – Saddam would have never been under any threat if he had NOT overrun Kuwait. But of course you still can’t answer why that charming moral degenerate, former President Clinton did nothing about a plot on GHWB. I guess squirrels have the retention abilities of goldfish.
kindness – it is very sweet of you to want out captured US troops to be held in humane conditions. Those held at Guantanomo ARE treated humanely. Unfortunately, the barbarians who capture our troops wouldn’t know a Geneva Convention from a Democrat Party Convention. Come to think of it, I can’t think of one group of our prisoners who have been humanely treated since the implementation of the Geneva Convention. Let’s see: Germany – nope, Japan – no way, Korea – nope, Viet Nam – ask John McCain.
March 26th, 2006 at 5:13 pmhi #7. good comment. i would like to add that not only were they not on the battlefield, many of those being held were actually SOLD into bondage by their compatriots. i think the u.s. was paying 500 a head for afghanis.
the words expressed by scalia show a truly disgusting, neoconservative, radical extremist, horse-shit crazy human being….
oh, and fuck bush
March 26th, 2006 at 5:14 pmhi #7, again. one source regarding the selling:
the report which the writer is referring is by study by Seton Hall law professor Mark Denbeaux.
March 26th, 2006 at 5:20 pmsource
March 26th, 2006 at 5:21 pmScalia Speaks Out On Detainee Rights…
In the upcoming issue of Newsweek the question of whether or not Justice Scalia should recuse himself from the upcoming Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld.
March 26th, 2006 at 5:34 pmThe Supreme Court this week will hear arguments in a big case: whether to allow the Bush administration to …
This is a clear case where recusal is necessary. I can’t imagine anybody mounting a serious defense to black recusal after he expressed these thoughts so explicitly. A failure to step aside for this one will create a very black mark indeed for the integrity of our federal judicial system.
– Manshake
March 26th, 2006 at 5:37 pmthen scalia should be impeached for not faithfully upholding the Constitution.
March 26th, 2006 at 5:42 pmAmong some of the more futile and counter-productive things to do right now in the Battle against the Devil (and he’s on the run, the Devil is) is to blindly take the side of detainees…
…whose names, situations, charges, and guilt or innocence, you could not possibly know.
And to do this publicly, before an American Public near blinded with fear of “terror”.
The Devil loves such diversions and distractions as that; you’d almost think he somehow fuels and advances them himself.
The Devil is crafty, to be sure.
March 26th, 2006 at 5:49 pm#66
If you would read the TP post Scalia does, in fact, use his son as a justification for his position. It is an emotional justification and I do not believe the a nonbiased decision can be rendered when a justice is quite emotional about the case.
It is difficult to believe that his internal decision, neglecting whatever legal justifications his clerks draft up, is based on emotions rather than rational analysis.
So I do believe it was a ‘good retort’.
Since you can’t get him to go just on his speech since he addressed a general topic (justices do have very broad power over whether or not to step down) tying the son in is a good idea to get him to step down or at least taint his involvement to a greater degree.
If his son’s occupation is part of his justification he has a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. If he is unable to be impartial based upon his son’s service then I do not see it as any different from standing down for, say, owning stock in a particular company with a pending case.
Scalia ‘owns stock’ in his son’s occupation as he has shown. Since he is emotional about it as well it would seem appropriate that he stand down merely for that. It would not be a correct comparison if he was able to not have an emotional stance over it.
March 26th, 2006 at 5:56 pmGood to see the GOP investment finally paying off. King Guber needs all of the prejudiced help he can get. If lady justice is blindfolded, Scalia’s got his con cheek on her bosom. The SCOTUS investment will bring wingnut’s many happy returns for countless years.
March 26th, 2006 at 6:02 pmIn answer to someone’s question, we know most of them weren’t picked up on the battlefield thanks to public statements by the US Government, the US Army, the Pakistani government, the CIA, etc. etc. etc.
Well, unless you follow the insane “The whole world is our battlefield” logic which the administration seems to apply.
The various chicken farmers who were kidnapped, who were not carrying guns or attacking anyone when they were captured — this is not contested by the government — can’t possibly qualify as “captured on the battlefield”. The government contends that they did all sorts of evil things sometime in the past before they were captured. The government is unwilling to show anyone any evidence of this, however….
Really, would you trust the judgement of Bush and his buddies as to who actually was a danger and who was a case of mistaken identity? Cause I sure as hell wouldn’t.
March 26th, 2006 at 6:15 pm“Those held at Guantanomo ARE treated humanely.”
Delusional, completely delusional. You know why all of Europe wants it shut down? You know why Vladimir Putin of Russia and the people running China criticize it? Because the people there were not treated humanely. This has been confirmed repeatedly by leaks from military members, military lawyers, etc.; and also is confirmed by the repeated refusal of the US government to allow observation by organizations such as the International Red Cross (as is normally allowed in detention camps). Furthermore, we know that one particular commander explicitly ordered inhumane treatment, thanks to military records; the same one who ordered it at Abu Ghraib.
We know that Bush claims that the Geneva Conventions — which demand only basic humane treatment of prisoners — do not apply to the prisoners at Guantanamo. What possible reason could there be for that, now?
March 26th, 2006 at 6:24 pmJoe “Squirrel†Sixpack – Saddam would have never been under any threat if he had NOT overrun Kuwait. But of course you still can’t answer why that charming moral degenerate, former President Clinton did nothing about a plot on GHWB. I guess squirrels have the retention abilities of goldfish.
Comment by mighty aphrodite
Heh, heh. I know you like me, aphrodite. But that “Squirrel” moniker might stick. I mean, suppose the progressives here get the idea that I am some classless degenerate, a real rightwing redneck who lacks any real moral or ethical principles?
Now correct me if I’m wrong, hon, but you really shouldn’t lower yourself to namecalling and trying to bullshit your way through the posts here. I do have a serious question for you, though: what color panties you have on tonight? I’m betting pink, and they are WAY too tight on you.
YEAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHHH!
March 26th, 2006 at 6:24 pm“is to blindly take the side of detainees…
…whose names, situations, charges, and guilt or innocence, you could not possibly know.”
Don’t you see that that’s the whole point? I don’t know. Neither do you. Neither does any competent, impartial judge. We have no reason to believe that the Bush administration knows either, since they won’t show anyone any evidence — if anything the Bush administration seems to be making the case for their innocence, by their refusal to show any evidence of their guilt.
Just put them before an impartial judge and find out whether there’s any real evidence that they were enemy combatants. If there is, fine, keep them locked up! But do you trust Bush to decide on his own say-so? Cause I sure don’t.
The Devil isn’t on the run. One of his agents is in the White House, ordering people to be tortured; people who are quite probably innocent, because he won’t show anyone any evidence of their guilt. Also declaring himself to be the sole judge of what is law (forget Congress or the Courts), while he’s at it. The differences between the Taliban and the Dominionists running the US are frightening small: simply the matter of which holy book they claim gives them the right to murder people.
Amazing how many “Christians” have been fooled by this man’s lies, into supporting him without question. But then that’s only to be expected, I guess. Look up Chuck Baldwin.
March 26th, 2006 at 6:36 pmBut Justice Antonin Scalia doesn’t have to wait for arguments — his mind is already made up. Newsweek reports that in a controversial unpublicized March 8 speech, Scalia “dismissed the idea that the detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions.â€
The losers have the “right” to a military trial if the situation warrants. Frankly my guess is most of them deserve nothing less than to be fed alive to a herd of ravenous pigs. Distribute the film in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia as a lesson to potential Jihadies.
March 26th, 2006 at 6:37 pmAmazing how many “Christians†have been fooled by this man’s lies, into supporting him without question. But then that’s only to be expected, I guess. Look up Chuck Baldwin.
Comment by Anon
What’s amazing is how many Leftist Fuctards like you claim to be experts in WWJD. No, I won’t look up Chuck Baldwin.
March 26th, 2006 at 6:39 pmWhat’s amazing is how many Leftist Fuctards like you claim to be experts in WWJD. No, I won’t look up Chuck Baldwin.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — March 26, 2006 @ 6:39 pm
One thing Jesus would not do:
The losers have the “right†to a military trial if the situation warrants. Frankly my guess is most of them deserve nothing less than to be fed alive to a herd of ravenous pigs. Distribute the film in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia as a lesson to potential Jihadies.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — March 26, 2006 @ 6:37 pm
And it does not take an expert to know this just someone who grew up going to sundat school in this country………
March 26th, 2006 at 6:47 pm#90 You’re hungry IRI?
March 26th, 2006 at 7:03 pm[...] This week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether the special military commissions created by the Bush administration to try Guantanamo detainees violate national and international law [...]
March 26th, 2006 at 7:04 pmAnd it does not take an expert to know this just someone who grew up going to sundat school in this country………
Comment by Clif
Well…you got me there Clif, He will not feed the losers to pigs. He WILL feed the losers to vultures and assorted preditory birds though. I guess you haven’t read that far into the book yet. If there’s anything else you want to know just ax.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:10 pmfat tony should be impeached….right after the bushliar-criminal.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:12 pm.
Indict Vice President Cheney. Put him under oath.
Comment by plunger
You first Neo.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:38 pmFunny how Scalia, Bush, etc. on the right repeatedly refer to the Iraq occupation as “war”, such as: “war is war” or “we are a nation at war”, etc. But still the Bush administration refuses to give the detainees POW status and Geneva Convention protections as should be the case during a time of war. As usual they try to have it both ways. One can only assume that they enjoy the killing and torturing.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:42 pmAnd we get our first daily dosage of racism from our resident KKK member, I-RIGHT-I.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:51 pm#87 – “You know why all of Europe wants it shut down? You know why Vladimir Putin of Russia and the people running China criticize it?” –Anon
*****Europe, who stood by and watched while Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, the phyisically and mentally retarded and homosexuals were lined up for extermination??? Russia AND China – who wouldn’t know a human right if it bit them in the a$$???? hahahah…
They have no right to a military trial – did you see their uniforms – I didn’t think so.
Joe “Squirrel” Sixpack – That name is with you as long as I deem fir to respond to your stupidity. But I did note that you were manly – as long as one was comparing you to a “neutered squirrel”. If you like, I’ll start adding neuteredto your nick name….
March 26th, 2006 at 8:02 pmLiberal are wrong.
Geneva requires all of four specific criteria be met for for legal combatant status, and al Qeida meets none of them. Hence, al Qeida members do not get protection under Geneva. Moreover, even if al Qeida members were legal combatants, Geneva doesn’t require a trial for them!
Liberals are wrong, uninformed, and misinformed on this issue.
March 26th, 2006 at 8:09 pmUmmm, mighty aphrodite,
What does Russia and China’s stance on human rights have to do with how many troops they have in their military. If they wanted to attack us together, we would be fucked. It isn’t about the left or the right “liking” the Russians or Chinese. It has to do with who would win in a world war. The US cannot continue to pick fights world wide, when we don’t have the military force to fight world wide. The number of allies we have is on a downslide. That needs to be corrected. It isn’t about “we don’t need X country” Sometimes it isn’t about winning, sometimes it is about what is best for our country.
March 26th, 2006 at 8:12 pmdear #102
au contraire–i love using french with neocons–if you ever get a chance, read up your international humanitarian law; rather than listening to fox, if you would read from time-to-time, it might make your arguments more compelling.
here is a link to an amicus brief arguing why the geneva convention DOES apply.
have a nice day!
oh, and fuck bush
March 26th, 2006 at 8:35 pm#102 – Jeff,
Speaking as a veteran, allow me to say the following as an unnoficial spokesman for every man and woman who dons a uniform to protect your freedoms:
FUCK YOU!!!!
I have a I on the back of my military ID in the box marked “Geneva Conv Category”. This means that should I be captured on the battlefield, I must be designated as an “enemy combatant” (sounds familiar doesn’t it?) and held under full protection of the Geneva Conventions. The sad reality that you immoral assholes don’t realize is that we have troops all over the world in harms way. We need to grant the same protections to our prisoners that we would want our own soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines to receive should they be in the same situation. Not only is it the only moral course of action, it’s just plain good policy! How can you fools not realize that every person that we hold indefinitly in cruel and inhumane conditions has family members that will now be predisposed to hate Americans. The egregious errors in judgement our government have made in the execution of this police action around the world have created FAR more terrorists (or future terrorists) than we will ever be able to kill and will, probably, cost American lives and some point down the road. Why are all right-wingers so fucking short-sighted?
March 26th, 2006 at 9:15 pmYou just assume that all of these Arab Gitmo detainees are al Qaeda terrorists? A little racist are you?
March 26th, 2006 at 9:16 pmgreen917,
Well said.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:18 pm[...] The comments caused quite an uproar, especially on the left, with many stating the case for recusal. [...]
March 26th, 2006 at 9:25 pmSpudge,
Thanks! This happens to be something that I am rather passionate about. Too many relatives who spent time in VC camps during Vietnam and FAR too many friends still wearing a flag on their sleave to feel any other way about it. It boggles my mind that these idiots can yap and yap and yap about policies that go against everything that we as a nation, and as a people, stand for and not see what the ramifications will be. They can’t really be that self-serving and egoistic, can they? Don’t answer that! Alas, I already know the answer and it makes me feel sorrow for the state of my country.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:25 pmJustice Scalia must either resign from the Supreme Court or according to our Constitution he can be impeached for willfull violation of not upholding federal laws and not following the protocols of the Geneva Conventions! I doubt that his son was in any position of danger in Iraq and since he knows Cheney personally he could have his son out of harms way with one phone call to the White House! Everyone is entitled to judicial rights, and GITMO is run like a Nazi Concentration Camp, so shame on Scalia!
March 26th, 2006 at 9:30 pm#53: No FDR imprisoned hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans for years and denied them the rights they deserved as US citizens and lefties dont call him fascist.
Comment by Troll
About 120,000 Japanese-Americans were interned during World War II; years later a formal apology and compensation were issued to them.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:36 pmInterning Japanese-Americans just because of their racial background was undoubtedly one of FDR’s worst mistakes–perhaps the worst. But I don’t know any liberal/progressive who have defended it. On the other hand, conservative pundit Michelle Malkin, herself of Asian (Philippino) background, wrote an entire book defending the racial profiling of Japanese-Americans during WWII. One of the trolls here defended it, too, not so long ago.
Anyway, what are you trying to say: that it’s okay for Bush to do that because something similar happened during WWII? And, by the way, the internment of Japanese-Americans, though very unjust, was not brutal like the treatment of prisoners in Gitmo, etc.
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land …. ” United States Constitution, Article VI.
Yet how easy it is to suspend the Constitution and Treaties protecting basic human rights when we are at wa:. Adams with the Sedition act; Lincoln, suspending habeas corpus; FDR and the japanese internment camps. Fortunately we regained our sanity after each of those episodes. Why, then do we repeat these offenses?
March 26th, 2006 at 9:57 pmThis is judicial misconduct, and grounds for impeachment.
I think it’s time we gave serious thought to a drive to do exactly that.
March 26th, 2006 at 10:17 pm#18 – troll,
March 26th, 2006 at 10:23 pmTry this:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/j.h.kinsey/The%20Times.LeCarre.htm
I’m still trying to find this in W’s 2000 campaign statements. It’s there as well..
I am saying the actions of FDR were far worse than those of President Bush and yet the left seems to give him a pass. While President Bush is labeled a Nazi Fascist for what most reasonable people would consider much less objectional actions. I might find the positions of the left more palatable if they were more consistant.
March 26th, 2006 at 10:39 pm“And, by the way, the internment of Japanese-Americans, though very unjust, was not brutal like the treatment of prisoners in Gitmo, etc. ”
Comment by Lora — March 26, 2006 @ 9:36 pm
Lora I will be kind and argue that overall FDRs victims would beg to differ.
March 26th, 2006 at 10:43 pmLora I will be kind and argue that overall FDRs victims would beg to differ.
Comment by troll —
Have you ever met or spoken with any Japanese-Ameriicans interned during WWII? I have. And do you know any liberal/progressive who defends such treatment of Japanese-Americans like conservative darling Michelle Malkin?
March 26th, 2006 at 11:08 pm“And then Troll the Jewish People of the Holocaust also had no Rights? Because it was a WAR?
Comment by Hamster Brain — March 26, 2006 @ 4:07 pm
What a ridiculous statement. This is apples and oranges you rodent. I never said the detainees had no rights. The only way you Morons can win a debate is to make shit up. Have you been hanging with RAINMAN or are you one in the same?
March 26th, 2006 at 11:10 pmtroll > Whatever wrongs FDR did were years ago and he is long dead! Bush is the current president and he is committing offenses against our Bill of Rights, and the Constitution, so that is why we want him to resign or be impeached!
March 26th, 2006 at 11:12 pmNo Lora but i have read quite a lot on the subject. Who is Michelle Malkin? She sounds alot like liberal/progressive darling Louis FariCON.
March 26th, 2006 at 11:16 pmRandal libs are glad to throw around the name of FDR when it suits them no matter how long ago it was. My point is to demonstrate not only the libs hypocrisy but that when you fight a war some things have to be done which we under normal conditions would not do. What has President Bush or the US to gain from holding innocent people? It has been an enormous political liability. It seems to me those most concerned are simply ideologues taking advantage of an Achilles heal.
March 26th, 2006 at 11:29 pmWaltTheMan,
I gave a troll a link to the ‘He tried to kill my dad’ quote in post 19. No need to search any harder.
It is a CNN quote from when Bush was on stumping for war in Iraq on Septemer 27, 2002
CNN
September 27, 2002
Bush calls Saddam ‘the guy who tried to kill my dad’
March 26th, 2006 at 11:35 pm
#120 – troll
The detainees are either “enemy combatants” or they’re not! You can’t have it both ways.
If they are, in fact, “enemy combatants” then they must be afforded FULL protection of the Geneva Conventions. If they don’t qualify under Geneva, then they must be classified as a “non-enemy combatant” (meaning that they do not belong to an army or organized militia) at which point, their detention is no longer a military matter but a criminal one and, by our own laws, they must be afforded council and a trial. President Bush and his minions have tried to play both sides to the middle of every single aspect of the execution of this police action (including calling it a war) in order to further their greed and hubristic view of American hegemony. Every imperial army in history has eventually learned a painfull lesson that we, obviously, have yet to learn: If you mistreat your enemies (particularly when they are held captive), it will ALWAYS come back to bite you in the ass eventually. The Zhou learned it after persecuting the Shang, the Romans learned it in Brittany and elsewhere (the goths of Germania got really fed up and eventually sacked Rome), the British learned it in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere and yet, some of us don’t seem to get it. This is all on top of the fact that mistreatment of detainees/prisoners never provides actionable/viable intelligence. In the immortal words of Nice Guy Eddie, “If you beat him enough, he’ll tell you that he started the Chicago fire.”
March 26th, 2006 at 11:42 pmWow the Moron-A-trolls are out tonight. Their dream come true has crumbled. Even major Neocons have said Bushco is a diaster. But, the Fu*ktard moron-A-trolls will never get it. Nothing but roaches and vermon. Each day more and more people and getting it, Bushco is the worst preznit in all of American history and IRI wants to lick his balls.
March 26th, 2006 at 11:59 pmWho is Michelle Malkin? She sounds alot like liberal/progressive darling Louis FariCON.
……….Achilles heal.
Comments by troll —
Why don’t you look up Michelle Malkin on google? She writes, among other things, for townhall.com, which also hosts other well-known (well, maybe not to you) conservative pundits like Ann-thrax Coulter, Linda Chavez, Robert Novak, etc. And she wrote an entire book defending the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII.
March 27th, 2006 at 12:04 amIn all your so-called reading about the internment of Japanese-Americans, did you read about torture methods such as water-boarding being practiced at the camps? And anyway, the point of this website is “thinkprogress”–not to slip back into unfair treatment of people just because it happened under a president who has been dead for over 60 years.
Incidentally, “heal” means “to cure.” If your’re talking about a part of Achilles’, or your own foot, the word is spelled “heel.”
Green,
They can bring suite but from my understanding they have no right to have council provided. So they obviously have limited rights but not the full rights afforded a US citizen or of a person caught in the US.
Joe
You kiss your mother with that mouth?
March 27th, 2006 at 12:24 amLora
Thanks for the correction the font is quite small and I miss some errors in my editing.
I have no interest in Michelle Malkin and your question “…did you read about torture methods such as water-boarding being practiced at the camps?” misses the point. Finally how can we have “progress” if we cant have civilized dialogue where participants actually listen to their opponents arguements so consensus can be reached?
March 27th, 2006 at 12:35 am#127 – Show me where it says that one must be an American citizen to have the right to a speedy trial or council?
March 27th, 2006 at 12:44 am
I think they fall into the enemy combatant catagory as far as the Constitution is concerned but are not covered by the Geneva convention. There does seem to be gray area there and that is precisely what the court is to decide.
March 27th, 2006 at 12:58 amyour question “…did you read about torture methods such as water-boarding being practiced at the camps?†misses the point. Finally how can we have “progress†if we cant have civilized dialogue where participants actually listen to their opponents arguements so consensus can be reached?
Comment by troll
My question about waterboarding doesn’t miss the point. I earlier wrote that the internment of Japanese-Americans, though reprehensible, was not as brutal as what is going on at Gitmo, etc. You begged to differ but have, thus far, provided no proof of comparably brutal treatment of the Japanese-Americans. I also pointed out that it is conservatives like Michelle Malkin –not any prominent liberal/progressive–who have defended the racial profiling of Japanese-Americans during WWII. You have provided no contrary cases.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:06 amFinally, I can not understand how your question, “Finally how can we have “progress†if we cant(sic) have civilized dialogue where participants actually listen to their opponents (sic–an apostrophe is needed) arguements(sic) so consensus can be reached?,” works in as a defense of what the Bush administration has been doing to detainees at Gitmo, etc.
Japanese American detainees where shot and killed for resisting why dont you google it and learn for yourself.
Yes should the SCOTUS determine that they should be tried and afforded certain rights I would accept that but if its a legitimate question should libs be accusing the President of the United States of being a nazi? Its disingenuous and shameful.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:24 amI think they fall into the enemy combatant catagory as far as the Constitution is concerned but are not covered by the Geneva convention. There does seem to be gray area there and that is precisely what the court is to decide.
Comment by troll — March 27, 2006 @ 12:58 am
As I said to you before; two hands on the keyboard, you’re all over the road.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:33 amRainman how are you? Typical non sense but thats ok. Being murdered or shot does not count as torture?
MORON
March 27th, 2006 at 1:36 amJapanese American detainees where shot and killed for resisting why dont you google it and learn for yourself.
Comment by troll — March 27, 2006 @ 1:24 am
And made to lay in their own feces? Or made to masturbate each other? How about chained naked to the floor? Anal glowsticking?
March 27th, 2006 at 1:37 amRyan, now he’s descending into conservative parody.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:38 amNo, Scalia, you don’t “[get] a break”. You’ve got nothing but breaks up to this point. You’re an irresponsible and corrupted man who dares to call himself a justice. You don’t need to recuse yourself; you need to resign.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:42 am” And made to lay in their own feces? Or made to masturbate each other? How about chained naked to the floor? Anal glowsticking? ”
Comment by dano347 — March 27, 2006 @ 1:37 am
I dont care what you and Rainman did last night
March 27th, 2006 at 1:45 am#130 – Troll
Per Article IV of the Geneva Conventions, most of them actually fall into the “prisoner of war” category:
I could go on and on and on. As I said in my earlier post, per the Geneva Conventions themselves, if they fall into the “enemy combatant” category they are entitled to ALL of the rights afforded by the Geneva Conventions. You can’t have it both ways! Not to mention the crux of my earlier argument. It’s just good policy to ALWAYS abide by the Geneva Conventions regardless of the semantics.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:46 amBYE
Rule #1 dont argue with an idiot and you fit the mold so see ya.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:47 amAnother day another pussy troll.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:48 am“I dont care what you and Rainman did last night”
Comment by troll — March 27, 2006 @ 1:45 am
Way to refute that argument, I’m awed by your rhetorical expertise!
P-U-S-S-Y.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:52 amWell, gotta’ go myself, but I leave you with a few words from Roman historian Tacitus:
Augustus won over the soldiers with gifts, the populace with cheap corn, and all men with the sweets of repose, and so grew greater by degrees, while he concentrated in himself the functions of the Senate, the magistrates, and the laws. He was wholly unopposed, for the boldest spirits had fallen in battle, or in the proscription, while the remaining nobles, the readier they were to be slaves, were raised the higher by wealth and promotion, so that, aggrandised by revolution, they preferred the safety of the present to the dangerous past. Nor did the provinces dislike that condition of affairs, for they distrusted the government of the Senate and the people, because of the rivalries between the leading men and the rapacity of the officials, while the protection of the laws was unavailing, as they were continually deranged by violence, intrigue, and finally by corruption.
March 27th, 2006 at 2:13 am#149 – Ryan,
And (S)He is a fucking coward to boot! It must really suck to have to flee everytime you’re losing an argument.
March 27th, 2006 at 2:47 amJapanese American detainees where(sic) shot and killed for resisting why dont you google it and learn for yourself.
Comment by troll
Troll,
March 27th, 2006 at 4:42 amYou have brought up the exceptional case of Japanese-Americans who tried to escape. Do you have any information that the ones who stayed in the camps were water-boarded, strung up by the ankles and left dangling for hours, had lit cigarettes or blow torches brought near their genitals, etc.? I have talked to survivors of the internment camps and helped to edit the memoirs of one. While the man who wrote his memoirs was bitter about the racial slurs, etc. he endured, he never mentioned torture.
As for yourself, we all make typos and experience stuck keys; however from what I’ve seen of your postings, your errors clearly go beyond that. Why don’t you learn to spell (or at least use a spell check) and use punctuation (such as using question marks after sentences that are clearly questions)?
#149- Ryan, I have been thinking the same thing. And it may just be my imagination, but I think “Sybil” has 3 identities. From #90-98, IRI, #101, MA, (one comment) and #117-144, Troll. Their style of writting bears many similarities. A “he”, a “she”, and an “it”. The Trifecta.
March 27th, 2006 at 5:59 amEd Whelan does make an excellent legal argument over at Bench Memos. However, I think analyzing this issue in terms of legal procedure is incomplete. We must look to politics.
Chiefly, Who is Scalia addressing? Obivously, at the lowest level of generality, he was replying to a question posed; thus, he was addressing the poser of the question. At a higher level of generality — one that takes politics into account, Scalia is mobilizing conservatives (e.g., Ed Whelan and his audience, Rush Limbaugh and his audience) by making provocative statements that the AP will most probably air. Because he makes what is a convincing argument if true — the Court has NEVER done XYZ, it automatically puts conservatives on notice that if the Court does XYZ, then the Court is deserving of criticism.
An obvious rejoinder is that Hamdan, as a case, was likely to garner extraordinary attention and criticism in any event; but this rejoinder is too general. The relevant theory is that Scalia cares about the kind of criticism to which the Court is exposed and cares about the the size of the audience that pays attention, because the effect of his statement (from which one could try to induce his motive) is to influence the internal dynamics of the Court. Why?
Let’s see. Roberts is recusing himself, and there is the possibility of a 4-4. Alito has been confirmed as a “conservative” jurist, but has yet to take a position on the War on Terror as a Supreme Court Justice. The stakes are high for Alito’s reputation within the conservative community — “Don’t become a Kennedy” — and this only serves to raise the stakes. In other words, a decisive win is needed, a persuadable vote could be on the fence, and a likely vote is out of play.
But Alito is not enough. Scalia needs to force the hand of those who seek to keep Court opinions consistent with public opinion and those who hope to steer the Court onto a path on the right side of history. One need only scroll down on http://www.orinkerr.com to see a post on Breyer commenting about O’Connor, and one only need look to Kennedy’s majority opinions in Gonzalez v. Oregon, Roper v. Simmons, and Lawrence v. Texas to note that there are Justices who care about international opinion, national opinion, and public opinion in general, because they believe it links the Court’s jurisprudence to public legitimacy. The line that Scalia is drawing here by making a provocative statement from Switzerland, much as John Kerry did from Davos, Switzerland in calling for Alito’s filibuster (I will not quote Hegel here, but I think the farce came first in this context), is that the elites of the United States and the elites of Europe have different mass bases before which they must appear legitimate. A Supreme Court opinion that is consistent with what elites in Switzerland think and inconsistent with what the mass of Americans think would appear an illegitimate opinion: Scalia is actively promoting the likelihood that those interested in legitimacy vote his way by stirring up opposition to an outcome inconsistent with what American public opinion will be after it is shaped by his comment that the Court NEVER DOES XYZ (and the implicit: a. the Court never does XYZ for categorically good reasons; and b. thus, the Court should not do XYZ in the case of Hamdan). In other words, this is not just a push on Alito, but also a push on Breyer and Kennedy to separate from Stevens, who thinks Rasul was a wonderful day in the park, rather than a departure from bedrock American principles. If you think about it, that’s 5 votes: assuming Scalia and Thomas will vote how Scalia suggests he might, Alito, Breyer, and Kennedy are the other “gettable” votes for Scalia in the absence of Roberts. (Note: This analysis is not a slight against Thomas; Thomas is more conservative than Scalia.)
So, what is Scalia doing? Trying to cobble together a 5-3 in the absence of Roberts! Is that a reason for him to recuse himself? Well, he was just giving a personal response to a question asked at a conference. The newspapers didn’t have to report it. And we can’t really prove what Scalia’s motives were, only speculate as to what they likely were given the foreseeability of their impact on public opinion, if covered by the press. That doesn’t sound like evidence of pre-judging a case to me; at worst, it sounds like advocacy. But is it really advocacy? Scalia is not responsible for MSNBC having reported on these statements (with a picture in which he looks dastardly) 6 times in the past hour (and it isn’t even 6 a.m. yet!). Scalia is likewise not responsible for Newsweek choosing to run its article prior to the oral arguments in Hamdan as opposed to afterward (e.g., after the decision is handed down). And given that this is what Scalia might have said during conference with the other Justices in any event (i.e., he would have aired these views prior to the decision being issued), what, really, is the problem? It begins to seem like the news media is trying to create a clamor for recusal because that will sell more magazines and advertising time on cable news.
Waitasecond: corporations interested in selling stuff and a Supreme Court Justice (a member of the political elite) having an opinion that a signifigant number of Americans find controversial…hmm, this doesn’t really sound as provocative or as novel as I thought when I began writing it.
March 27th, 2006 at 6:10 amJessica Alba are you pulling a Ben Domenech? Isn’t your whole post lifted from this?http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2006/03/justice_scalia.html under the name of commentator.@ 05:58 Thanks for the link to the Scotus blog.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:02 am156 # My god Karma is quick these days
24 hours
Bomb at US-Iraqi base kills 30
March 27th, 2006 at 7:07 am#149- Ryan, I have been thinking the same thing. And it may just be my imagination, but I think “Sybil†has 3 identities. From #90-98, IRI, #101, MA, (one comment) and #117-144, Troll. Their style of writting bears many similarities. A “heâ€, a “sheâ€, and an “itâ€. The Trifecta.
Comment by Cyra Brown
Ryan and Cyra,
March 27th, 2006 at 7:39 amThere are definite similarities in style and spelling errors. But, on the other hand, Mighty Hypocrite usually over-punctuates, while Troll often doesn’t punctuate at all.
In any case, I was glad to read the astute opinions of green917 and was disgusted, though not particularly surprised, to see the chickenhawk troll’s attempt to tear this person with actual military experience down.
Good morning Lora
I was definately not on game at that time of the morning I am back
You wrote
“Do you have any information that the ones who stayed in the camps were water-boarded, strung up by the ankles and left dangling for hours, had lit cigarettes or blow torches brought near their genitals, etc.? I have talked to survivors of the internment camps and helped to edit the memoirs of one. While the man who wrote his memoirs was bitter about the racial slurs, etc. he endured, he never mentioned torture.” Comment by Lora — March 27, 2006 @ 4:42 am
The conversation was about “…whether the special military commissions created by the Bush administration to try Guantanamo detainees violate national and international law…”. Not whether the torture was justified.
“Why don’t you learn to spell (or at least use a spell check) and use punctuation (such as using question marks after sentences that are clearly questions)?
Because I can see cant type and am not anal retentive like you are. Libs take short cut all over this site and I do to.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:41 amThe conversation was about “…whether the special military commissions created by the Bush administration to try Guantanamo detainees violate national and international law…â€. Not whether the torture was justified.
“Why don’t you learn to spell (or at least use a spell check) and use punctuation (such as using question marks after sentences that are clearly questions)?
Because I can see cant(sic) type and am not anal retentive like you are. Libs take short cut all over this site and I do to(sic).
Comment by troll —
Troll,
March 27th, 2006 at 8:04 amYou were the one who brought up FDR, who has been dead for over 60 years (or “50 years” in the opinion of I-WRONG-I), and the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII. Now that you can’t defend your statements on that, you are changing the subject again.
I don’t even understand the meaning of your last sentence about taking short cuts. Anal retention is not the problem here; it’s basic literacy. Your arguments might be a bit more effective if you could occasionally write at least one sentence in correct English.
Good night (I am currently in a different time zone from you) and good luck.
I did defend my position you changed the subject to torture.
March 27th, 2006 at 8:13 amGnight
Bye the way he has been dead 50 years, he has been dead for 40 years, he has been dead for many years. You understood what he meant but chose to be a jerk about it. Its too bad I thought maybe I had found a civilized human being among the libs.
Actually green was being civilized until Rainman came along and so rudely interupted.
Then he was proud to admit he was an autistic savant.
Thats hilarious
March 27th, 2006 at 8:28 amGood Morning all,,,,,C-Span on this issue call in right now if you want to speak your ideas….Blessings
March 27th, 2006 at 8:43 amAmerica is heading down a dark path, led by “intellectuals” like Scalia. Once you go down the path of totalitarianism, it’s hard to get back.
We never needed to take these ominous turns before. Surely we have the inherent character to not take them now. We have the legal documnent that’s guided us for centuries to lead us. Why are we turning away from it? Why don’t we err in ITS favor instead of in our narrow emporal own?
March 27th, 2006 at 8:59 amIt is fascinating how some would seek to justify our current holding of citizens from a foreign state by pointing to he Japanese internment camps created under FDR’s watch.
The internment of people of Japanese descent during WWII was later declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL by the Supreme Court.
The distinction in Guantanamo is that the base is not on “U.S. soil” even though the prisoners are held under U.S. command and control. Is that enough to trigger Constitutional protections, or has the Administration found a way to hold people indefinitely? Stay tuned for another episode of “All My Detainees.”
March 27th, 2006 at 9:26 amThank you Briseadh na Faire for stating the issue in objective terms.
March 27th, 2006 at 9:38 amwe are not at war!
March 27th, 2006 at 10:39 amNo islamofascist just want to have a tea party. They are simply misunderstood.
March 27th, 2006 at 10:41 amComment by Ryan Neat
Welcome back, Ryan.
We’ve missed you.
March 27th, 2006 at 10:49 amIf Gitmo is not on US soil, we have invaded Cuba as well. Someone doesn’t understand the rules of the game, or rather, this admin likes to play fast and loose with the rules, that’s why they must go. We lease Gitmo from the Cubans. In a very real sense, it is US soil, like any embassy in a foreign land is the “soil” of the countries whose diplomatic mission is there.
BTW, Welcome back, Ryan.
Glad your back.
March 27th, 2006 at 10:54 amI have been to Dachau Concentration Camp in Germany and Adolf Hitler used the same justification for rounding up people without judicial due process and keeping them in detention without any legal rights! GITMO has simularities to Dachau in many ways > in the beginning it was just mistreatment of detainees, then torture began, eventually executions of the prisoners!
The Bush Regime is repeating the crimes of Nazi Germany, unless we stop them now!
The Japanese Americans who were detained by President Roosevelt were NEVER abused or tortured, but they were denied their rights during the war! It was wrong what FDR did, but he is long dead and what happened is past history, not the present like Bush with GITMO!
March 27th, 2006 at 11:21 amTo all of you who say that the prisoners captured during wartime or otherwise have no rights then I would suggest that you try to remember what our country stands for. I would refer you to the US Declaration of Independence.
“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 doesn’t mean just Americans. If it did, it would say “…that all Americans..” We are a nation that used to stand for the moral high ground on freedom. Bush himself has said something along the lines that the terrorists have attacked us because they hate our freedoms. Sorry I don’t have the time to search for the exact quote, I’m to busy here in Iraq. Needless to say, in my opinion we as a nation are loosing the battle of ideals based off of the hysteria of the right. The idea that a man doesn’t have a right to a fair trial is a slap in the face to everything we stand for. Yes, it is true that our enemies here will not give us a fair trial, that they will more than likely torture information out of us and cut off our heads. This does not make it right for us to do the same to them. We are better because we choose the moral high ground. We are better because we choose to follow conventions of universal human rights. (at least we used to) How can we scream out against the evils of the world when we practice the same evil?
March 27th, 2006 at 12:13 pm#79- “On June 26, 1993, the U.S. launched a missile attack targeting Baghdad intelligence headquarters in retaliation for the attempted attack against Bush.”
March 27th, 2006 at 12:54 pmComment by….
*****WOW!!!!! That really scared the $h*t out of Saddam…..
Jay Randal excuses the Japanese internment camps “as being a looong time ago” – but foolishly began his post with his “personal” observations of Nazi death camps.
As a good prog, your sweeping, yet ignorant, statement that Japanese “were NEVER abused..” is to be expected. Take a ride to Manzinar. The weather in winter could be described as “brisk”. You can’t have it both ways – but from “double talk” progs, who is surprised?
Jews were taken to camps for BEING Jewish. Detainees in Guantanamo are there for overt or covert ACTIONS against the US or our troops. Simply being “Arab” or and “Arab sympathizer” did not earn their passage to Cuba.
Your argument is full of straw, has no parrallels and is WEAK.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:39 pmYour argument is full of pious crap mighty-fool! I visited Dachau in Germany and was lucky enough to have spoken with a former prominent inmate of that camp during the war! He was a Catholic Priest, who spoke out against Hitler, and was imprisoned without trail for almost 7 years! From 1938 to early 1945 > he was released a few months before Hitler commited suicide in Berlin! He told me everything that occured at Dachau > the camp was filled with German Social Democrat Party members, Gay men, clergy like himself who opposed Hitler, Labor leaders, German soldiers who rebelled against the war, Gypsies and Jews too! Russian soldiers were used as target practice for training SS troops > 100,000+ Russians shot there!
Some prisoners at the camp were used in experiments by the infamous Doctor Mengele! The Priest even saw Himmler visiting the camp and witnessed him having his SS nephew shot for being found out as Gay! Torture was a daily practice at Dachau, including using German Shepherd dogs to bite prisoners, just like what happened at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq by our soldiers!
I never said that the Japanese that were interned at Manzaner did not suffer during the war! They were not abused by the guards or tortured, so for you to even insinuate that is BS! You better learn real facts instead of calling people on here with “first-hand” knowledge, like myself, ignorant, because you are comparing apples with oranges! FDR is long dead, but your bastard fascist Bush is alive and harming the entire world! Shame on you!!!
March 27th, 2006 at 2:13 pmJay – You are correct – other “undesirables” were taken to Nazi death camps, opposition Catholics and clergy, homosexuals, Gypsies and the disabled. But that “fascist” Bush ain’t coming for the likes of you – your free speech is protected. You can go right on defending an enemies right to communicate with each other. You can go right on advocating the release of people who would slit your throat as look at you. Thank GOD, we don’t have people like you defending us…but our troops know how grateful you are for their service.
March 27th, 2006 at 2:22 pmMighty, if they were spying on terrorists, they’d have probable cause and would have had no problem using the FISA court. They have up to 3 days after they’ve started wiretapping before they have to get that court order, and there are plenty of people that work in the government bureaucracy to get that authorization. There’s no legitimate excuse to not respect FISA law. The issue isn’t that people don’t want them spying on terrorists, it’s that we don’t want them spying on us.
Secondly, you’ve obviously ignored the fact that all of the prisoners are being kept without charges being filed against them. They have no access to the Red Cross or outside attorneys or other contacts. And we’ve been shown no proof that they’ve done anything. You don’t take it “on faith” that the government is doing this to protect you, and you don’t take anything on faith in a court room, either. That’s not how law works. You need evidence. Evidence we have not been shown.
March 27th, 2006 at 3:27 pmTo all of you who say that the prisoners captured during wartime or otherwise have no rights then I would suggest that you try to remember what our country stands for. I would refer you to the US Declaration of Independence.
“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.â€
That doesn’t mean just Americans. If it did, it would say “…that all Americans..â€
Comment by L.J. Abershawe
Muslim headchoppers have the right to be shot, imprisoned, tortured and hung if they make war against the United States. They do not have the right to a trial.
They are created equal, just as equal as you if I caught you in my house raping my wife and murdering my young son. Same deal for you, no trial. At some point a man ceases to be human in the eyes of man and God. You kill them like a rabid animal. That’s what you do.
The men at Club Gitmo are known to be the worst of the lot we’ve captured in Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s only because we are better that they are still alive. If elected President I would change that policy.
March 27th, 2006 at 3:56 pmWhich court international or otherwise has rendered an opinion on the actual legal status of the those held at Gitmo?
March 27th, 2006 at 4:23 pm“They have up to 3 days after they’ve started wiretapping before they have to get that court order, and there are plenty of people that work in the government bureaucracy to get that authorization.”
What if ALL of the wire tapping information was gathered in say 20 minutes or 20 hours after the that wiretapp is ordered? The law doesn’t state (I don’t think) that the information gathered cannot be used untill a FISA court basically rubber stamps an operation….correct? Right or wrong sounds like a loop hole in the law.
March 27th, 2006 at 4:35 pmIf elected President I would change that policy.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — March 27, 2006 @ 3:56 pm
At the rate you’re going, I don’t think you’ll still be alive at 50.
March 27th, 2006 at 4:42 pmBye (SIC)the way he has been dead 50 years, he has been dead for 40 years, he has been dead for many years. You understood what he meant but chose to be a jerk about it. Its too bad I thought maybe I had found a civilized human being among the libs.
Comment by Troll
Troll,
March 27th, 2006 at 5:18 pmI am civilized. I don’t use expletives like “F..ktard,” “ratbastards” or “anal retentive” towards people with whom I don’t agree. Admittedly, rhe temptation to correct I-WRONG-I’’s error about when WWII ended was too strong considering how he loves to call liberals/progressives stupid. And how am I to know what he really meant? I’ve seen him write outlandish things like that 80% of the executives of Fortune 100 companies are Democrats, that the Blue States steal taxes from the Red States (in actuality, the Blue States pay more in federal taxes than they get in return), that nobody vacations in Red China (tell that one to anyone in the tourist industry), etc. In reality,I occasionally give in to the urge to correct some blatant IRI errors, but if I went about trying to correct all of them, I would never get any real work done.
“Jews were taken to camps for BEING Jewish. Detainees in Guantanamo are there for overt or covert ACTIONS against the US or our troops. Simply being “Arab†or and “Arab sympathizer†did not earn their passage to Cuba.
Your argument is full of straw, has no parrallels and is WEAK.
Comment by mighty aphrodite ”
And yet that’s the hard cold reality. Many of those in Gitmo are children, and many more were released because they knew nothing. Sounds like being a ’sympathizer’ was sufficient based on this.
“Jay – You are correct – other “undesirables†were taken to Nazi death camps, opposition Catholics and clergy, homosexuals, Gypsies and the disabled. But that “fascist†Bush ain’t coming for the likes of you – your free speech is protected. mighty moron”
Really? Is that why the ‘quakers’ are on no fly lists? Because if their free speech were protected, their right to travel and ease of movement wouldn’t be the price for that ‘free’ speech. You know the travel restrictions were among the first ‘rights’ taken away from the jews as well. History repeats itself, and reichwingers are always reichwingers. Lying, thieving hatemongers – through and through.
“You can go right on defending an enemies right to communicate with each other. You can go right on advocating the release of people who would slit your throat as look at you. Thank GOD, we don’t have people like you defending us…but our troops know how grateful you are for their service. Comment by mighty aphrodite”
ScareCrow Mighty Moron is fill with straw again. Considering most of the arab world probably feels that way about you, are you suggesting we put them all in a prison camp? Maybe we can build big ovens and make soap with them?
You’re such a NAZI FOOL.
And if those people are so dangerous, why have so many been released without charge?
DUHHHH!!!!
Mighty Moron strikes again. Another stupid argument, based on a stupid premise, with a stupid ‘train’ of thought that was derailed before it began.
I used to think mighty moron was 14, but I overestimated. Maybe 10 at best – at least psychologically. If this is as ‘complex’ as your reasoning gets, you have no hope of ever being a lawyer mighty moron. The world is far too sophisticated for you meager capacity.
March 27th, 2006 at 6:25 pmam civilized. I don’t use expletives like “F..ktard,†“ratbastards†or “anal retentive†towards people with whom I don’t agree
[...]
I occasionally give in to the urge to correct some blatant IRI errors, but if I went about trying to correct all of them, I would never get any real work done.
Comment by Lora
Yes, yes we know you’d never say shit even if you had a mouth full. But I seldom use expletives. Fucktard is not an expletive, it’s a dyslogism or if you prefer a pejorative. I use a lot of those. Now get back to work.
March 27th, 2006 at 6:29 pm“You better learn real facts instead of calling people on here with “first-hand†knowledge, like myself, ignorant, because you are comparing apples with oranges!
Comment by Jay Randal — March 27, 2006 @ 2:13 pm
Jay that would be second hand.
I too have been to Dachau. More relevant is the fact that my wife and children are the descendants of Europren Jews who had to flee anti-semitism. I initiated the internment discussion to demonstrate that President Bush and the conservatives are no more nazis than FDR. If you would be honest you will notice an enormous amount of anti-semitism on the left in unusual places like Ivy league campuses. Rascism exists on both sides. Tyranny is something men of all persuasions are prone to. The gravity of the horrors perpetrated by thr Nazis should cause us to consider carefully the application of the term Nazi and not use it as a casually as it is often used on these pages.
With that said I do believe that fundementalist Islam is a fascist ideology which is a true threat to all we hold dear. We need to get a grip on our borders and find out who is already here before its too late. Polls show that even recent immigrants agree this is urgent. Yet neither side of the isle is willing to do what must be done to fix the problem. Everyone went nuts over the port deal and the polls acted. Our porous southern border is a security problem which must be addressed.
Lora,
March 27th, 2006 at 7:11 pmAre you an English teacher? I’ve never had anyone online care let alone correct my errors. I should not have called you anal retentive sorry.
I went to China on vacation… when I was still a Republican Christian too.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:27 pmLora,
Are you an English teacher? I’ve never had anyone online care let alone correct my errors. I should not have called you anal retentive sorry.
Comment by troll —
Troll,
March 27th, 2006 at 7:32 pmNo, I am not an English teacher, but I work with language in other ways, such as an editor in the past and mostly a translator/interpreter between English and Asian languages now. In my line of work, I have encountered a diplomatic flap that nearly occurred between the US and a friendly country, simply because of a mistranslation in an official document, which was fortunately caught and explanations/apologies offered.
I am also aware that the US intelligence agencies are sorely lacking in competent translators/interpreters of Arabic and other languages commonly spoken in the Middle East and Muslim countries. There are hundreds of thousands of hours in backlog of untranslated intercepted telephone calls between suspected terrorists. One intercepted the day before 9/11 even hinted of the “day of glory tomorrow” wasn’t translated until well after the terrorists struck. So all this Bush administration talk of needing warrantless eavesdropping to stop terrorists is nonsense, when the intelligence agencies lack the means to get the intercepted text translated for months. I hope you realize that the likely terrorists are unlikely to be talking to each other in English. That is why we progressives/liberals have good reason to fear that the Busheviks are simply wiretapping the domestic opposition; Nixon tried the same thing. And by the way, shortly after Pearl Harbor, the FDR government set up special language schools for intensive study of Japanese; more time has passed since 9/11 than between Pearl Harbor and the end of WWII, and the Bush administration still hasn’t developed a comprehensive policy on increasing the number of intelligence agents competent in Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, etc.
Your apology is accepted.
“I initiated the internment discussion to demonstrate that President Bush and the conservatives are no more nazis than FDR. troll”
Actually Bush is MUCH more of a Nazi than FDR was – considering that NAZISM is a rightwing ideology that interwines business, religion and government into an unholy marriage. And that’s EXACTLY what Bush has done.
You really need to learn more about Nazism – and I would have thought that the experiences of your wife would have taught you something. It obviously didn’t.
“If you would be honest you will notice an enormous amount of anti-semitism on the left in unusual places like Ivy league campuses. Rascism exists on both sides. Tyranny is something men of all persuasions are prone to. troll”
That’s a load of crap. There are lots of people who are neither racist, nor prone to ‘tyranny’. Don’t project your character flaws on others – it’s unseemly. And you’re full of guana on the anti-semitism part. Reichwing morons claim that anyone who wants the voices of both Israel and Palestine to be heard are anti-semitic. And just so you know butthead, the arabs are SEMITES, meaning that most of your tirade, and the tirades common from the right are in fact ANTI-SEMITIC. So answer me this, how can defending the right of BOTH groups of semitic peoples be heard be construed as Anti-semitic? Easy, you’re too RETARDED to know what basic english words mean.
Get a clue moron.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:38 pm“The gravity of the horrors perpetrated by thr Nazis should cause us to consider carefully the application of the term Nazi and not use it as a casually as it is often used on these pages. troll”
Nazi is a set of political ideals, most of which were inherited by PNAC through their mentor Leo Strauss – WHO WAS A NAZI. Just because you retards haven’t perpetraded the SCALE of Nazi crimes, doesn’t mean you don’t act like Nazi Criminals. When you consider the renditions, making people disappear, torture and even murder in the custody of the military – those are all acts consistent with Nazis. Maybe the modern Nazis haven’t murdered or disappeared as many people, but that doesn’t deflect from the reality that the actions of you and your fellow republicans is 100% nazi like!
March 27th, 2006 at 7:41 pm“I used to think mighty moron was 14, but I overestimated. Maybe 10 at best – at least psychologically. If this is as ‘complex’ as your reasoning gets, you have no hope of ever being a lawyer mighty moron. The world is far too sophisticated for you meager capacity.”
Comment by Ryan Neat — March 27, 2006 @ 6:25 pm
This coming from a person who considered being called an autistic savant a compliment. In his case it was a compliment.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:42 pmIt is fascinating how some would seek to justify our current holding of citizens from a foreign state by pointing to he Japanese internment camps created under FDR’s watch.
The internment of people of Japanese descent during WWII was later declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL by the Supreme Court.
The distinction in Guantanamo is that the base is not on “U.S. soil†even though the prisoners are held under U.S. command and control. Is that enough to trigger Constitutional protections, or has the Administration found a way to hold people indefinitely?
As a further note, if the indefinite detention of foreign nationals IS held to be Constituional, then the U.S. would be violating international laws. Again, this is a war on “terrorism.” It is not a war against a foreign state. If it were, then the war would be over when one side or the other surrenders and the “enemy combatants” would be released.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:43 pm“This coming from a person who considered being called an autistic savant a compliment. In his case it was a compliment.
Comment by troll”
How would you know, you don’t seem to know what the word ‘fascism’ mean. You’re hardly a ‘judge’ on the considerations or observations of other now are you dumb troll?
And riddle me this moron? If Nazism is such a ‘negative’ term because of the deaths and atrocities involved with the movement, then why isn’t Communism treated with similar care? After all, Mighty Moron and MizzWrong both claimed that the atrocities of communism are worse than Nazism. And yet, both claim liberals are all communists.
Doesn’t that just make you guys retarded hypocrites? After all, I don’t hear liberals calling for the abolition of private property – but the convergence of religion/business/government bundled with fervent nationalism (the hallmarks of nazism) ring from the republicans like a bell.
I guess practicing what you preach is too much to ask someone who can’t pick up a dictionary.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:46 pm“This coming from a person who considered being called an autistic savant a compliment. troll”
Autistic Savants are generally correct – you by contrast seem never to be. So yeah, relative to your world, that’s a compliment – MORON.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:47 pmBriseadh na Faire,
Ah, a reasoned and honest critique of the situation – well done. Too bad it will fall on deaf ears of the ReichTards.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:48 pm“With that said I do believe that fundementalist Islam is a fascist ideology which is a true threat to all we hold dear.” comment by troll.
There are many who feel the same about fundamentalist Christianity. The extremes of both groups have strayed from the original message. Religion has been perverted as a source of power over others.
As for the borders, this just in on cnn.com:
“Government investigators used fake documents to enter U.S. with radioactive material for two dirty bombs, according to report. ”
Until we address the root problems, we are all at risk. It is only a matter of time.
Time to make sure that life insurance policy covers “war or acts of war.”
March 27th, 2006 at 7:49 pmRyan,
There may be hope:
It seems I have struck a chord on both sides of the isle.
The real issue here is fundamental human rights. The times when we want most of all to deny those rights to an individual, or a group, are the very times we must work to insure those rights are protected.
It is easy to love our friends. It is hard to love our enemies, to love those who would seek to do us harm.
March 27th, 2006 at 9:44 pm[...] Think Progress suggests that since his honor's son is so initmately involved in the war, he should consider his own recent ruling and reconsider participating in judgement of the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case (which questions whether a detainee should be tried in a civil court or under the Geneva conventions): Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. [...]
March 27th, 2006 at 10:24 pm[...] Think Progress has all the facts right. [...]
March 28th, 2006 at 2:34 am[...] Think Progress has all the facts right. [...]
March 28th, 2006 at 2:34 amPost 188 troll > Getting the information about Dachau from a former inmate of that camp is “First Hand” facts! The Priest passed away many years ago, so I am now his voice, because he passed his knowledge onto me and asked me to never let fascism occur again! If you have been to Dachau, as you claim, then why do you defend the Bush Regime on here?
Ryan Neat has told you better then I could, that Bush and his cabal of criminals are acting like Nazi/Fascists! Remember that it took Hitler about 12 years to kill all the people he did, so Bush has only been in power 5+ years now! Dachau was Hitler’s first Concentration Camp and GITMO is Bush’s first Concentration Camp! Do we want Bush to build more of them?
As for mighty-moron > if she is a lawyer, then I would hate to be one of her clients > lol. She does not seem to understand that Bush is taking away all our rights and may soon try to lock us all up in detention camps?! Take off the blinders and notice Bush is a fascist!
March 28th, 2006 at 7:06 amPost 188 troll > Getting the information about Dachau from a former inmate of that camp is “First Hand†facts! The Priest passed away many years ago, so I am now his voice, because he passed his knowledge onto me and asked me to never let fascism occur again! If you have been to Dachau, as you claim, then why do you defend the Bush Regime on here?
Comment by Jay Randal —
I have just come back from a gallery event with my husband in the time zone whrere we are currently located. I am not entirely sober but hope to be coherent, nevertheless. I have not visited Dachau but have been twice to the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam–a very wrenching experience even the second time around.
March 28th, 2006 at 8:15 amI have also visited Holocaust/Jewish centers in various major cities around the world. I particularly would like to recommend the one in Sydney, Australia. The first few floors are devoted to the history of Jews in Australia–starting with petty thieves who were sent by England to its penal colony in the South Pacific. On the upper floors there iis information about the Holocaust, with actual survivors of the actual concentration camps, ghetttos, etc. there to tell you their stories. Obviously these people are getting old and won’t be around much longer. Any reader here who has the opportunity to visit Sydney, I urge you to visit this museum.
[...] Earlier this month Scalia was asked during a symposium at the University of Freiberg in Switzerland whether or not “detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions.†Newsweek chronicled his comments which roused quite a stir from the students; and later mainstream media and bloggers. “War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts,” he says on a tape of the talk reviewed by Newsweek. “Give me a break.” Challenged by one audience member about whether the Gitmo detainees don’t have protections under the Geneva or human-rights conventions, Scalia shot back: “If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son and I’m not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it’s crazy.” [...]
March 28th, 2006 at 9:11 amour Detainees in Guantanamo are there for overt or covert ACTIONS against the US troops. Simply being “Arab†or and “Arab sympathizer†did not earn their passage to Cuba.
Your argument is full of straw, has no parrallels and is WEAK.
Comment by mighty aphrodite
Mighty Hypocirite,
March 28th, 2006 at 9:21 amHow do you know what the detainees in Guantanamo are there for overt or covert ACTIONS against the US or our troops? Do you have some information that has yet to be made public?
I have read stories of men arrested simply for having the same or similar name as a prominent person in Al Qaeda or the Taliban. To give a similar analogy, when I was at university, one could not simply dial the on-campus operator and ask fdr “Steve Brown” because there were already eight Steve Browns in the male dormitories.
Think about it a bit, dear. Have you considred the possibility that some innocent Muslim men with names that are the Middle East’s or Afghahi’s equivalent to Steve Brown are being sent to Gitmo?
To quote your own words, “Your argument is full of straw, has no parrallels and is WEAK.”
“With that said I do believe that fundementalist Islam is a fascist ideology which is a true threat to all we hold dear.†comment by troll.
There are many who feel the same about fundamentalist Christianity. The extremes of both groups have strayed from the original message. Religion has been perverted as a source of power over others.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
There are many Leftist Losers that hate everything Christian and don’t mind at all dragging out ancient history to make the comparison between “fundamentalist” Christianity and “fundamentalist” Islam. As for either one straying from “original” message, that’s bull but you’d actually have to study and be honest to know that. We know that ain’t happening.
It seems I have struck a chord on both sides of the isle.
Not with me. Your analysis reeks of touchy feely Utopian UN bullshit that has never worked and has no basis in the reality of the situation we find ourselves in.
The real issue here is fundamental human rights. The times when we want most of all to deny those rights to an individual, or a group, are the very times we must work to insure those rights are protected.
How can the issue be “human rights” when the people YOU are concerned about have only murder in their hearts? The issue is killing the enemy and destroying his will to fight. It’s people like you that give him hope and a renewed vigor to go on killing, bombing and headchopping. You simply do no know what you’re talking about and in fact are an enemy of peace loving people around the world.
It is easy to love our friends. It is hard to love our enemies, to love those who would seek to do us harm.
There ya go again paraphrasing that Jewish guy you really don’t believe ever existed. But here’s a hint, Christ never said to love the alien race of headchoppers that are attacking you and killing your children and threatening the peace and security of millions of people. To love that particular enemy only means to kill his leaders and bring the remaining population into a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Love is helping your fellow man by risking your life to destroy the destroyers. No one can be said to have greater love for Iraqis and the people of the Middle East and America than our men and women who have given their life to free them from the tyranny of the Islamist terrorist.
“Blessed are the peace makers”. I take that to mean that God favors our Marines who shoot the dogs who make war hiding behind women and kill children as easily as they swat a fly. When we kill enough of them there will be peace and not before.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:31 amThere are many who feel the same about fundamentalist Christianity. The extremes of both groups have strayed from the original message. Religion has been perverted as a source of power over others.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 27, 2006 @ 7:49 pm
I’m learning that in every ‘organization’ there are extremes on both sides of the fence and that most people fall in between.
It’s the few extremes that create the havoc, while the majority are honest, hard working people who are kind, generous and respectful.
And then, that is what we focus upon. Partly because we have no choice.
Sad what the public education system has taught me about extremists…
March 28th, 2006 at 9:41 amLora,
Good point! Remember, even Senator Ted Kennedy was on the no-fly list! It took a United States Senator 2 full weeks to clear his name. What chance does a foreign national have, not speaking the language of his captors, and subjected to torture, all without access to a lawyer.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:42 amUnbelievable,
It’s the few extremes that create the havoc, while the majority are honest, hard working people who are kind, generous and respectful.
I agree. And each extreme, dogmatically convinced of the “rightness” of its cause, seeks to anihilate the other.
Meanwhile, the rich and powerfull are drinking champagne, never realizing they are on the deck of the Titanic.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:50 am[...] made up. Think Progress » Scalia Claims Guantanamo Detainees Have No Right to Fair Trial check out the BlogBites Search Engine swicki ateurekster.com [...]
March 28th, 2006 at 9:54 amI agree. And each extreme, dogmatically convinced of the “rightness†of its cause, seeks to anihilate the other.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 28, 2006 @ 9:50 am
Maybe we should introduce them, and let everyone else get out of the way? :)
March 28th, 2006 at 9:59 amI-Right-R is really wacky today > he insinuates that Jesus would want us to kill Muslims? He needs to read each chapter of the New Testiment Bible very carefully and stop promoting the killing of people in Christ’s name!
March 28th, 2006 at 11:19 amLora post 204 > I have been to Amsterdam, but did not get a chance to go inside the Ann Frank house, but I walked by it when it was closed! I did see the destroyed building with all the dolls nailed to the walls, rotting away in the rain > they were taken away from the Jewish children sent off to the Concentration Camps to be gassed to death > horrible reminder of what evil Hitler did to people! If you ever travel to Germany, then please go see Dachau Camp > in many ways it is still like 1945 when the inmates were liberated! The barb wire fences are still in place with the machine gun nest towers, and imposing Administration building that now houses photos and items of life in the camp under brutal Nazi guards! The iron gate with “Arbeit Macht Frei” ( Work Makes Freedom) above it still is in place and gives you chills! The crematorium that looks like a Bavarian cottage from the outside is still like it was in 1945, and the small gas chamber is still there too! The Priest who greeted tourists to tell his story of imprisonment at the camp has passed away, but I will forever remember our 3 hour chat about the camp > he told me “Go Always Forward, God Always Forgives.” > he said never allow this to happen again! I cry because it is happening again under Fuhrer Bush and he must be stopped before he kills millions like Hitler did!
March 28th, 2006 at 11:38 amI-Right-R is really wacky today
Comment by Jay Randal — March 28, 2006 @ 11:19 am
Today? :)
March 28th, 2006 at 12:46 pmJay,
March 28th, 2006 at 5:55 pmJust as you will also treasure your talk with the priest at Dachau, I will similarly always treasure the conversation I had with an Auschwitz survivor who volunteers a few days a week at the Sydney Jewish Museum. Her two sisters died there, and she never saw her parents again.
Another interesting place to visit is a museum in Budapest (can’t recall its proper name right now), which displays the excesses of both the Fascist and Communist regimes, including torture chambers, etc.
I agree that it is unfortunate that some of our reichwing trolls here seem to have learned nothing from recent history.
God Always Forgives.†> he said never allow this to happen again! I cry because it is happening again under Fuhrer Bush and he must be stopped before he kills millions like Hitler did!
Comment by Jay Randal
Equally complicit in those murders were the peace-pussies like you and Chamberlain. Were it not for Churchill England would be no more. Were it not for Bush the Hitler’s of the Middle East would destroy the Joooooz, Murder every Christian in Africa and be free to make good their threat to globalize Islam.
Jay you are nothing if you are not a useful idiot.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:40 am