Wow, wow, wow. Huge!

So does that mean the extraordinary rendition portion of HR10 that was passed in 2004 (9/11 recommendations implementation act) is also unlawful? It was sponsored by Denny Hastert, you know.

I think this means that the left will stop whining about our system being unfair.....for about 2 hours. Then you'll forget all about how fair and great this country is.

So what does it mean when your Commander in Chief has been found by the highest court in his own country to have violated American law and the Geneva Convention protocols?

Nothing.

It means nothing to this band of criminals. The neo-cons will start bitching about a liberal court. FOX will bitch about a liberal court. Rush will get it up over a liberal court. The republi-cons in Congress will ignore it. The administration will simply ignore it. And Abu Gonzales will still have his thumb up his ass.

Nothing will change. Now, if the military actually followed it's oath to protect the constitution we would see them frog march these fucks to the Hague. But the military is getting the same hard-on over the deaths of our beautiful young people in Iraq as the administration gets. These fuckers and the neo-cons are the most reprehensible group to come along in American history. The single worst period in our nation's history, ever.

Then you'll forget all about how fair and great this country is.

When people like you are stomped flat, and your children and grandchildren revile you for what you are and what you did to this country, that's when I think it becomes fair.

Bush will tell SCOTUS to shove it up their ass. He cannot accept being told what to do, either by Daddy or Mums or courts or the legislature. We'll see some sort of stalling action and the equivilant of a signing statement, with Bush reserving the right to interpret the ruling in a fashion allowing him to continue doing what he pleases. I can see Rove advocating a showdown as helpful in the '06 midterms, painting the ruling as dangerous and favoring terrorists in their jihad against America. Maybe some sort of super-duper war powers ploy will be tried. Whatever happens Bush won't be dictated to as to his actions. He's a sociopath and he's the only person on the planet that counts in his mind.

Who thinks he won't delay this and keep them there until 2009?

I bet he's dying to repeat the old "let 'em make me" tough guy bullshit.

Fuckin' activist judges, upholding the Constitution like that.

So shocking: Thomas, Scalio and Alito dissented. This is going to be the most predictable SCOTUS we've ever seen.

Shit ann, you beat me to it!

Fuckin' activist judges, upholding the Constitution like that.

I bet they interpreted it from some French law. You know how they are. Interpreting French laws and shit like that. They need to stick to what it says in the Constitution. And the Constitution does not say "Gitmo" anywhere. This is proof that the pretzledent has a right to ignore this decision.

I say "Frredom Laws", not "French Laws". We are in a war against "Terra", and many rights have to be abondoned to preserve our rights!

So shocking: Thomas, Scalio and Alito dissented. This is going to be the most predictable SCOTUS we've ever seen.

You mean other than Kennedy playing the rhetorical pinata and loving it?

"When people like you are stomped flat"

Phid: That doesn't sound like Democracy to me. It actually sounds like crazy speak.

Phid: That doesn't sound like Democracy to me. It actually sounds like crazy speak.

Sounds pretty "Reasonable" to me!!

Now crawl back under that rock of yours.

Do we really have a system of checks and balances left? *clasps his hands together in prayer, with a slight tear in his eye*

OK, a bit much!
At least some members of SCOTUS have more balls than congress!!

Phid: That doesn't sound like Democracy to me. It actually sounds like crazy speak.

I borrowed it from the neo-con agenda. The one you support. I don't think you understand Democracy, our brand of Federalism, or the Constitution. I've yet to meet a neo-con who does.

Let me just give you my translation of that. You'll be stomped if you are a Conservative. Am I totally wrong about what you said?

Can we please stick with the topic of this post, and not hijack it with this garbage about who said what? There are other blogs for that.

No, that means you'll be stomped under the boot of Lady Justice, Straw Man.

There ain't a real Conservative in power in DC, just as you're not a real Reasonable person, as your comments have proven. You started out okay, sortof, but you're true colors soon showed through.

You're a troll. This comment thread is about bush getting his ass handed to him by an "activist" Court, it isn't about you, so take your WATB carcass and go cry somewhere else.

Duckman, I figgered he wouldn't last, they never can. The welling hatred inside won't allow 'em to hold it in. Predictable as the Alito/Scalia/Thomas cabal.

Well, I'd say old King George is having himself a bad week. It'll be interesting to see if he still has his swagger, or if he starts taking July and August off at the ranch for the next two years.

Can we please stick with the topic of this post,

Point taken.

You'll be stomped if you are a Conservative.

As to the topical Supreme Court decision, it will be ignored. The Constitution and Bill of Rights have no meaning to you or your chimporer. I would say president, but that implies some form of competence. Something sorely lacking from this administration. The administration will ignore this decision, as it ignores our civil rights, and people like you will support then for it with your heads full of "Terra" as you wipe your asses with the Constitution and piss on the Bill of Rights.

As for stomping conservatives, I would never imply that. Conservatives are fine. But neither this administration nor you are true conservatives. You are neo-cons. It's like the difference between an eagle and slime mold. Now, as for stomping the slime mold flat, we are being left all the tools to do just that. The slime mold are putting them in place at a heady pace.

I'm a "conservative."

These fuckstains in DC are NOT conservatives. The three-freak cabal on the SCOTUS are NOT conservatives.

I believe in conserving things while pursuing the progress that human beings inevitably and correctly seek. I believe in conserving the Constitution and our government. I believe in conserving our fiscal health and international reputation. I believe in conserving our habitat and resources and natural wonders. I believe in conserving our military might and in conserving our American morality of helping those who seek freedom and liberty that has served us so well.

Yes, I dare say that I am a conservative, and these asslicking twats who claim the term most certainly are NOT.

These

OK I'll ask you this then. How am I not a conservative? Right, kind of hard when you don't know me.

So Justice Kennedy saves the day, we'll see how long he can keep it up.

As for this decision demonstrating the "fairness and greatness" of the court and country, note that the RATS were adamantly opposed to such fairness, (Roberts obviously would have dissented) and that the newest Bush-tices were squarely behind their fuhrer....oops, Commander-in-Chief.

The future is theirs, and it won't be one of fairness and greatness.

In short, a final last gasp of the old "system". Enjoy it while it lasts.

With the brutal killing of the 2 kidnapped troops in Iraq, I wonder if Kennedy got a case of "The Ghost of Soldier's Past"?

Anything that drives us back to a Nation of Laws and that the USA sets the example for justice and equality around the world has to help!

Reason-unable, this isn't a fucking chat room, you moron.

Go down to a bar if you want to strike up conversations about yourself and your politics.

Maybe the poll you put up earlier in week showing A's had most trust in Judiciary had a grain of salt truth, eh? What I am thunderstruck about this ruling is the door opening on creaking hinges of how this impacts NSA, as you said, the rendition program, the Pentagon spying, all of these little Bush projects. The frosting on the cake was Larry Johnson's post that when Bush rushed to the microphone to announce the killing of Zaraqui (can't spell), he spewed forth to the world the name, rank, home base and activites of one of the most secret men and his unit that our forces have. I suppose Laura would call that childlike candor.

Jeez, as fast as it was headline news on my MSN homepage it has come down.
What's up with that?

SCOTUS is covering their collective ass; they know this regime won't last forever. Some admin will come in the White House down the line demanding accountability for crimes committed by the Bush Evil Empire.

Steve, you have a fine article. Are you enjoying your summer? I have sunburn

The future is theirs, and it won't be one of fairness and greatness.

As with any neo-con, their incompetence is endemic to their existence. This is true for Supreme Court justices. They can be impeached.

How am I not a conservative?

Squawks like a neo-con, smells like a neo-con, cites neo-con publications. Fuck, it must be a neo-con. Here is the final test: "Mein Fuhrer! Sie mich im Kolben!" Yep. Salutes like a neo-con. It's a neo-con.

Does this mean that FDR was committing crimes when we had German POW's held with out trial throughout WWII? If it was me I would declare they were all spies under the Geneva convention and then as provided by the law summarily execute every last one of them.

If it was me I would declare they were all spies under the Geneva convention

Damn right. We need to kill those kids caught playing soccer on the streets. They are spies. How do we know? Well, they're in Gitmo, ain't they. Terra! Spies! Ohhhh, I like the sound of that!

Avenger, IIRC, we had a congressionally-approved declaration of war against Germany, and those POW's were treated as such as easily-determined soldiers from the field of battle. Someone we round up and keep for four years without proving why, because they may be Al Qaeda or because we think we can squeeze information from them, isn't the same as holding a POW.

We've had years to put Osama's driver on trial based on what we already knew about him, and make that case stick, but we haven't.

Well you're obviously just making things up now because I've been criticized for never citing publications...quit your sweeping generalizations and let's have a civilized talk. I'm sorry but with the way you speak, the left and democrats will NEVER be in power again. Just some advice.

Geez, those 'pukes are a bloodthirsty bunch, aren't they? Some of those detainees were kids when they were rounded up. So Avenger wants to shoot a bunch of kids on a whim. Boy howdy!

The Geneva Convention also wasn't in existence during WWII.

I suppose Nero and Dead Eye's next move is to pull the US out of the Geneva Convention. Goddamn foreigners and their pansy ass "treaties"!! Abu and Yoo have probably got a memo all written up on it, and the Republican Congress can be relied upon to carry out every directive of the Dear Leader.

Reasonable, who were you directing that last message at?

quit your sweeping generalizations ... the left and democrats will NEVER be in power again.

Hiliarious!

euzoius, these guys never met a treaty they didn't try to break or back out of.

bu$hco is not following the Geneva Conventions now.
Don't forget the little tidbit from the soldier manual that was going to be deleted: "The Pentagon has decided to omit from new detainee policies a key tenet of the Geneva Convention that explicitly bans "humiliating and degrading treatment," according to knowledgeable military officials, a step that would mark a further, potentially permanent, shift away from strict adherence to international human rights standards."

Sorry, my last comment was directed at Phid.

SOS, I'd forgotten that one. Thanks for the reminder!

Yipppppppppppeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

My country is a member of the global collection of nations and not a lone banana republic like North Korea.

The fire and pitchfork crowd...lynching the Times?

That's a rather base accusation about people who have neither committed nor threatened violence. I know that many on the left believe that such primitive violence seethes just below the surface of their political opponents, but it's just a convenient way to feel brave and noble.

Fortunately, political violence is not common at all im America, but where it occurs, it has been by Democrats.

Fortunately, political violence is not common at all im America, but where it occurs, it has been by Democrats.

Chicago Democratic convention and Kent State, for starters...stupid fuck!

what a house of cards, a lier, trader to his oath and now war criminal .... what tolerance the "law" holds for the powerful !! if i so much as decline a request to identify myself to a police officer or refuse a roadside search of my car, i will be in jail, period !!
we are the stewards of this republic !! can we please be rid of these criminals' treasonous edicts and appointments ?
i am sure, that in the endless labyrinth of "law" created over the last three hundred years, a means exist to bring the real traders to justice. including those in the house and senate who "went along to get along". as stewards of our right to govern they have failed greatly by damaging the constitution, denying us protection from the power of a domistic/international criminal class.

T McVeigh

E Rudolph

True to your handle.

There's an excellent article in this week's New Yorker about David Addington, Cheney's chief of staff and principal legal counsel: The Hidden Power. Sadly, it is not available online, but there is an interview with the author, Jane Mayer. It's an interesting take on the whole BushCo grab for power.

Does this mean that FDR was committing crimes when we had German POW's held with out trial throughout WWII? If it was me I would declare they were all spies under the Geneva convention and then as provided by the law summarily execute every last one of them.

Yes, I'm sure you would. Asshole. My father, a Spitfire pilot, spent three years in various prison camps, including Stalag Luft III, and was number 66 out of the tunnel in the 'Great Escape'. He was one on only three Canadian officers who were not executed (shot) for the escape attempt. They picked names out of a hat.

Fortunately, political violence is not common at all im America, but where it occurs, it has been by Democrats.......

have you lost your fucking mind ? this nation was founded on genocide and slavery !!!

My anger might have gotten away from me, the Democratic convention in Chicago was squashed by Daly, and Johnson was still in power.

Ann, a little help.

SOS,

Eric Rudolph, the Abortion Clinic/Olympics bomber and scumbag Tim McVeigh come to mind were not Democrats.

Kent State was under Nixon, here's a story about it. Gov. Rhodes was a Republican, also.

Let's see, I can't think of those Democrat instances of terrorism, er political violence, other than during the Vietnam War, but I'm sure the wingers will supply the info.

Of course John Bolton's comments about the UN and Ann Coulter's comments about the New York Times don't count, right?

I'd be willing to say it's pretty even concerning political violence. We both have our crazies what with both animal rights and pro-life activists.

Left wing extremists in America tend to be of the monkey wrench variety. They break windows and burn stuff down. They have been known to smear paint on furs and trash SUV dealerships. Killing people, not so much.

Right-wing extremists on the other hand. Well, I don't think that it was lefties who killed MLK and the Kennedys. Gays sure have to watch their backs and it isn't because of Earth First. McVeigh has already been mentioned. You know, the guy who destroyed a day care center with the children still inside. You remember that don't you? Definately not a lefty thing to do.

Don't forget the KKK killing of Communist Party protestors in Greensboro NC in the Eighties. All of the lynching of blacks in the south. Repeated murders and bombings of abortion providers. Not left wing.

Do I need to go on?

Can anyone think of a terrorist attack in the US by homegrown lefties that resulted in any deaths? Nothing jumps out at me.

Ann, a little help.

1968.....Dem Convention in Chicago.....yes, it was ugly "The Whole World is Watching." Daley sent the thugs out to silence the crowds because he was embarrassed to have anti-war protestors seen in Grant Park.

I tend to agree with Duckman, though, the anti-choice crowd and the white supremacist crowd are typically the most violent and they certainly aren't Dems.

See, that's why we call you troll and neo con, because you simply lie and make shit up and don't have the courage of any convictions.

I'd be willing to say it's pretty even concerning political violence.

That's just an out and out lie, and you can't proclaim victory and go home. Well, you can, but then you're just acknowledging the falseness of your claims, and the validity of ours. But you won't do that either.

Coward.

See how silly you look, lack of Reasoning skills, when you repeat Rush's talking points? Your arguments all seem so... flaccid and tiny.

well i was trying to be "reasonable" but ok. Since you're the party with a KKK member in it i'm going to ahead and chalk all the KKK crimes up to your party.

Duckman:
"I can't think of those Democrat instances of terrorism, er political violence, other than during the Vietnam War"

And how do you get the right to conveniantly remove all the Vietnam protesters from this discussion? The discussion isn't of who's right but who resorted to violence.

In other words, like any 'puke, you'll cheat, change the rules, or ignore the truth altogether. Idiot.

There's two words you should use in this situation Coyote and they are "I concede". It's a stupid fucking discussion anyway and holds no bearing today whatsoever.

The dude can't even make a sensible point.

It's about time you surrendered your untenable position, you sad little thing. Who's the surrender-monkey now, Mr. Change the Subject After Humiliating Defeat?

Sorry, Steve, I couldn't help it. I'm finished, now that sad-boy's done.

Don't forget O'Lielly and his comment about the Coit Tower in San Francisco.

Oh Oh I surrender my position now because you called me a neat name. Man Coyote you're good at this debating thing. You must have went to the Community College.

Ku Klux Klan

Man Coyote you're good at this debating thing. You must have went to the Community College.

Reasonable, I can see your PNAC youth membership has served you well.

I have got to say, that is the nicest thing somebody has told me on here SoS. And to think, all it took was calling somebody out and demanding some integrity.

Re: Vietnam War

Half of the War Protestors are republicans then and now.

And it wasn't political violence so much as civil disobedience against an ill-conceived war.

And seizing control of the Presidents office at some college is not political violence, it's civil disobedience.

As is marching in the streets and waving signs and calling politicians liars and cheats and cowards and traitors and other less dignified names.

Killing somebody, as has been done to Doctors who provide abortion services is not civil disobedience, it's murder and terrorism for the right to "life" cause. A riot in Chicago, instigated or abetted in all likelihood by Nixon's goons is not political terrorism, it's a riot.

Burning down ROTC buildings which were part of the mechanism for conducting that war was not terrorism, it was destructive civil disobedience.

Killing people in Olympic Park for whatever retarded cause is murder and political terrorism.

So, back to my first challenge, which was to identify all those Democratic instances of terrorism in America. We're all still waiting.

You're damn right we called you out for being an idiot, and we're still waiting for your integrity to show. But we're not holding our breath, li'l troll.

Was there political violence in Jurassic Park?

I'm gonna have to call all my paleontologist friends and ask 'em.

This is a really pointless arguement but I'll play and I'll start off with three words:

Black Panther Party

No need for links eh? Ok good. On to the Vietnam protesters. BTW I love how you use the term, "civil disturbance", that's just as good as "redeploy". lol.

In 1970, Police Officer Michael O'Keefe and his partner were in a patrol car near Main and Minnesota streets, not far from the UB campus, when a group of protesters threw a brick through a bank window.

O'Keefe and his partner tried to drive through the crowd to get to the bank. "They kept beating on the roof, spitting, swearing and throwing things at us," said O'Keefe, now retired. "It was crazy, everything was boiling over, and I was scared out of my wits."

Here's the link...if it works

I don't know if this really counts since it was against cops. I know how you guys dislike those law enforcers! Let me know if the rules changed though.

In August of 1965, Berkeley students were picketing trains of Vietnam bound troops in nearby Emeryville and in October of 1967, fifteen Berkeley students were arrested for participating in protests at the Oakland Military Induction Center. The protest at the Military Induction Center turned into a violent riot involving 10,000 demonstrators and 2,000 police; in the aftermath, seventy two U.C. Berkeley students were cited by the University for planning the event on campus.(1)

Here ya go.

I guess you forgot that a good number of the protesters weren't just "marching in the streets and waving signs and calling politicians liars and cheats and cowards and traitors". Those people ruined alot of innocent people's lives. But it's ok i'm sure it was just a mistake, that or you're a dumbfuck who thinks if someone of the left says something, people should just bow down and accept it as truth. Anyway, this is just the first couple links I found. Sure there's plenty more if you need it.

Again, rules might change because of this but how about the Rodney King Riots? That was very peaceful. But I'm sure it'll be disregarded cause they were just angry.

All of that said and I will admit that the crazies on the right are way out of control. I will go so far as to say that the reason it seems like we have more is that ours (on the right) are just crazier. But hey, that's just me being reasonable, i'm sure it will go unnoticed.

What up Coyote and Snark! I know you got love. Lets stop pretending.

Black Panther PARTY

Civil

Rodney King Riots, now that's rich. There's a difference between a riot and political violence, and those riots had nothing to do with politics.

Again, Vietnam was a protest against a policy, because, for some reason, college students didn't want to die for a fucked up war run by a bunch of soulless old men.

And if you want, you could consider, if you insist on thinking the anti-war was all Dems, then that means that the pro-war were all goppers, which would make their actions in Vietnam, like My Lai, political violence too, but then Democrats were involved in it oo, so, sorry, Vietnam just doesn't really apply to what you want to describe as political violence. Everybody in the nation was involved, right left and center, against each other. It just doesn't work.

Can you cite anything contiguous with my two previous gopper citations? And Earth Firsters aren't Democrats, they're idiots near as I can tell.

That was Civil DISOBEDIENCE

"It's a stupid fucking discussion anyway and holds no bearing today whatsoever."

Reasonable, and just who started this "stupid fucking" discussion?

"It’s called Marbury v. Madison, you fu*king political hack."

How can you equate foreign policy rulings with Marbury's judiciary & petition policy rulings?

Almost all court cases that dealt with whether the executive was overstepping its constitutional bounds in its foreign policy dealt with laws that were enacted to do so; it most cases, it said it was out of its jurisdiction.

The exceptions are when detainees file petitions of habeus corpus if they are American citizens.

Have you ever gotten a clue that the Court specifically gives the discretion to the pres. on whether to follow foreign treaties?

If the detainees are American citizens, all bets are off, of course. They are correct - that's probably why they ruled the tribunals unconstitutional since Bush wanted to have his cake and eat it too with an American detainee.

Cases like the Japanese internment camps had standing to sue and petition because they were American citizens, but when it comes to the Geneva Conventions, it's the pres. decision to administer foreign policy under him; it's Congress' job to prohibit him via taking the dough away from his gun funds.

If there was a law to regulate the tribunals, that could also be invalidated if the the law tries to establish policy with respect to a foreign treaty unconstitutionally.

But I take issue with your attack on Scalia: where the heck do you get the cahunas to him hack when he's not talking politics; you're quite inexperienced relative to him when you don't even know that the court doesn't have jurisdiction over foreign policy...

C'mon Duckman! #1 I didn't start this debate, I think the Village Idiot did. #2 My only claim is that we're even and that we both have our fair share of crazies. Has this debate not turned sour yet? It's getting more pointless by the minute and it happens to have started out pointless. Anyway, by your logic with the Vietnam war, is it fair to chalk up the Redcoats to the Dems? They wanted to tax the shit out of us. lol. Also, I think the arguement was based on who has more people who commit political violence. So when you say Eric Rudolph (wackjob) and McVeigh (fruitcake) you've got two, when I talked about ONE violent protest i've got 10,000. Sure ours are crazier but you've got more buddie. That evens themselves out.

Ryan, did you read the decision yesterday at all?

Sorry, you claimed political violence was all on the Democrats. Vietnam was pretty much universal, because you can bet your ass those 10,000, wherever you got that number from, weren't all Dems by any stretch.

So, since Vietnam, any Dems blowing shit up for their political views?

No.

GOP'ers?

Yes.

Retract your charge or go.

My only claim is that we're even and that we both have our fair share of crazies

I don't know, but it seems you idiots whacked 2535 Americans and 226 coalition in Iraq so far. You've done over 100,000 Iraqi civilians. Now, did you do it personally? No. But like a hangman, you pulled the lever. There is also much evidence that neo-cons, through their lack of attention to Americans, are responsible for the indirect deaths of millions of American children and those who are ill. Your "War on Drugs" is responsible for the incarceration of almost an entire generation of young Blacks. You are death and pain merchants, nothing more. Your tax policies? Revenue from taxes on the middle class increased 45% over the last 20 years, from business 6% during the same time period. You people did this. You are monstrosities.

I'm sorry but with the way you speak, the left and democrats will NEVER be in power again. Just some advice.

Unless you have control of all electronic voting in the United States, your poll numbers reflect otherwise. The single worst administration the history of the United States...and you support it. It's okay. When your grandchildren ask you about this time, tell them you voted Dem. Then they probably won't laugh at you.

I've never claimed that all the violence was on the democrat's side. go check the comments. oh yeah, read them this time. pay attention or don't participate.

Phid: The first part seems....idiotic? I just think you're really out there dude.

About elections, you guys were dancing around claiming you won everything in 04, it was funny. the whole time i'm thinking, it's closer than that! then it's all over and you're proven the losers you are and what is it now? oh right, we cheated. go fucking cry a river dude. YOUR the loser, and it aint proven by no online poll, it was by a REAL POLL. Have I told you I made up Liberalism as a child? I think everyone did. Then they paid attention and realized the world isn't 'Fantasyland".