The Supreme Court made a ruling
 

...that makes our constitution well again when it comes to Justice...and delivered a devasting blow to the Administrations flagrant violiation of individual rights.

Habeas Corpus has been restored!

Hooray for Civil Liberties~

link or info?

i wouldnt have told my parents

Did you post that statement in the correct thread...if so what does the statement mean?

They ruled that individuals (citizen or otherwise) cannot be held without adjudication by the courts. Basically restored Habeaus Corpus rights to all that are held by the government.

this sounds exciting post a link please I would love to read more about this

Supreme Court backs rights for Gitmo detainees
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...ow_article= 1

President Bush strongly disagrees
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

again a "conservative court" turns out to be strict constitutionalists. Very Interesting.

Justice Scalia writes, “The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion plays upon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.” Justice Scalia’s 25-page dissenting opinion concludes, “The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today. I dissent.”

I guess terrorist rights are more important than the safety of U.S. citizens. That's something the 5 justices, the dems, and the media can all agree on.

When the next terrorist attack comes, and thousands of dead bodies litter the streets due to lost intelligence as a result of this decision, perhaps they will realize what they've done.

I'm absolutely sickened by this.

The Supreme Court proves itself once again. Buck Fush!

Get sickened even more.

"Both candidates to succeed Bush in the November elections, Republican John McCain and his Democratic rival Barack Obama have said they will close the prison. "

This is a good thing, not a bad. It never protected you, that's just a bs excuse they use to keep people in jail, often people that did nothing wrong, without a lawyer, court, or any rights..

Do you spend every day worrying about terrorists? Damn it must suck to be you :(



Just a note, this is EXACTLY how the government would like you to think.

I watched an interview of Scalia recently and it's scary to think he sits on the Supreme Court. He was playing political word games over the issue of torture and not even intelligent ones.

I don't think I have ever spent one minute worrying about terrorists. Not even in the late 2001 timeframe... does that make me insane?

Not at all. Good to hear your head is not in the sand.....

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...500_AA249_.gif

ronbotx and theking have gay sex together

The irony of having someone who makes their living in the porn industry being for conservative judges. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh No shit. Bet they would think different if someone came knocking on their door, drug them away and held them for 20 years without even being able to tell their families what happened to them. Free country my dick.

You do know the guy in your avatar would have supported the desenting opinion, right?

I am still awaiting on all those terrorist sleeper cells that they swore were here and out to get us in 2001. There were like hundreds if not thousands of them.

So let me ask you a hypothetical question. Say you work for a large international company and they have a manufacturing plant in Malaysia. You get sent over there for a few weeks to do some work. One night a couple of the guys you work with invite you to go to dinner with them and some of their friends. You go and have a good time. On the way out of the restaurant you and the entire group are arrested. It appears that one of your co-workers friends is a suspected terrorist. You have never met the guy until that night and know nothing about him. But you were with him so you are considered a suspect and you are held.

Should they be allowed to hold you indefinitely and torture you at will even though they have zero proof or evidence that you are involved with this guy in any way?

I'm not saying that all the people in Gitmo are innocent victims. What I am saying is that we are a country where we must prove someone is guilty of something in order to detain them and even if we believe they are guilty we provide them legal counsel and ensure that they have an acceptable defense. These people are not US citizens and are not afforded all the rights that US citizens are, but they should be given some basic rights to show the world that we are dealing with them fairly. The war against terrorism is very much about ideals, beliefs and actions. How can we decry the actions of terrorists and call them barbaric when we hold people for years in prison without ever charging them of a crime? If we arrest people, torture them then hold them forever in prison without ever putting them on trial or proving that they are guilty of something this makes us look very bad. We have to prove to the world we are the civilized ones and that we act that way even towards people we don't agree with.

Don't get your conservative panties in a wad and say that I have called us terrorist either. I haven't. I have simply said that when we act in what many consider an irresponsible way it taints the reputation of this country and that reputation and our core values as a nation. Our leaders love to talk about God and how we are a good Christian nation. Well, it does say in the bible, "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you." and that is the point of this ruling. If we are ever going to win a war on terror we have to do onto these people as we would have them do onto us and lead by example.

We are supposed to be to a higher standard, people forget that.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. "

Benjamin Franklin

WRONG!

Ron Paul is the only Republican presidential candidate who voted against the Iraq War from the start. Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate with any respect for the Constitution and maintaining Congressional and Executive behavior anywhere near within set and explicit Constitutional limits.

In the Presidential debate Ron Paul gave a strong statement supporting privacy rights and stating that as President he would never abuse Habeas Corpus. Rudy Giuliani thinks that respecting the Constitution in that way is laughable

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=548

"Congress is not much better when it comes to protecting against the erosion of the centuries-old habeas corpus doctrine. By declaring anyone an “enemy combatant”—a totally arbitrary designation by the President— the government can deny an individual his right to petition a judge or even speak with an attorney. Though there has been a good debate on the insanity of our policy of torturing prisoners, holding foreigners and Americans without charges seems acceptable to many. Did it never occur to those who condemn torture that unlimited detention of individuals without a writ of habeas corpus is itself torture—especially for those who are totally innocent? Add this to the controversial worldwide network of secret CIA prisons now known of for 2 years, and we should be asking ourselves what we have become as a people. Recent evidence that we’re using white phosphorus chemical weapons in Iraq does nothing to improve our image."

The idiot has spoken.

Bingo you hit the nail on the head.

Gary

This has nothing to do with what he would do as a Congressman. It has nothing to do with the creation of laws. This is a decision based on how the constitution should be interpreted.

Ron Paul supports contructionist judges. In fact, his entire platform is based on that and how the government and courts have overstepped their boundaries. The strict constructionist judges dissented in this decision while the liberal judges were the majority. Argue it all you want, but Ron Paul is on the side of Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts when it comes to Supreme Court decisions.

I'll take his word for it.

wow id like to hear each one of your opinions on 9/11..

its funny that those of you who scream the loudest for the rights of "those who wish to harm us" are the very reasons why they want to harm us.

how ironic

Those arent the reasons they want to harm us, read and learn turn off the pundits. Also the right has no problem with W holding hands with Arabs, when most the 911 terrorists were Arabs. Also where's Bin Laden?

Really. So my wanting to defend human rights is why they want to harm us? I guess you also believe they want to destroy us because they hate our freedom. Please enlighten me has to how my desire to protect basic human rights is the cause of terrorist attacts.

Wow.. You clearly have a pea sized brain...

That doesn't make sense. They want to harm us because they would get rights in prison?

I am in favor of the way the court ruled...you ignorant criminal motherfucker.

This was a very close 5-4 split decision and shows how close we are to becoming a facist state. Just one more Supreme Court appointee by the Bush clique and all our individual rights will be up for reconsideration. Remember that the next President will appoint two and, maybe, three justices so let's get some more liberal votes on that Bench.

Know that 2 of those judges who voted with the majority were appointed by Republicans. George H. W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan.

He's one of those morons who believes Bush when he says "They hate our freedom."

If you claim to be a free country with liberty and justice for all, then you must practice what you preach. If you can jail people without due process and trial, then what separates the US from fascist regimes such as Iraq under Saddam?

they dont like the western way of life.. the freedoms we enjoy.. the abundance.. the indulgence.... pornographers would be the first to have their throat slit in their view.

what is so hard to understand about this..

dont you know anything about radical islamic ideology??

do you know the reason why they believe islam should dominate the world?? do you know the meaning of jihad..

do you understand that they have no regard for human rights let alone human life and would kill you the day they were let out of prison after you fought to get them out...

why do you all hate america. why do you pander to terrorists who would like nothing more than to see you and i killed.

we are not rounding up innocent people for the fuck if it.. there is a reason why they are detained.. this is a war they are the enemy.

this ruling is a disgrace and slap in the face to america. it sickens me.