Thursday, June 12, 2008

The BS Supreme Court!

The US Supreme Court Thursday ruled Guantanamo prisoners have the right to challenge their detention at the US military base in civilian courts, dealing a stiff rebuke to the Bush administration.

"The laws and constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times," the court said in its historic ruling, for the third time in four years striking down the government's case for trying "war on terror" suspects in military tribunals.

"Liberty and security can be reconciled; and in our system they are reconciled within the framework of the law," the court added, ruling that prisoners in the remote US jail in southern Cuba "have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus."

By a vote of five to four, the court found that even if the base was officially on Cuban territory, it was in fact operating as if it were on American soil.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the administration was "reviewing the opinion" but declined immediate comment.

Thursday's ruling should now give the prisoners and their legal teams the right under the constitution to demand to know on what basis they are being held.

So far the administration of President George W. Bush has refused to unveil the body of evidence to justify the prisoners' continued detention, arguing it would be against the interests of national security.

Detainees have long protested that they had been mistreated, and have questioned the very legality of the Guantanamo military tribunals, which the administration has said will try the cases of 80 prisoners instead of civilian courts.

The Supreme Court took up the issue of Guantanamo inmates in 2004 and again in 2006, ruling both times that detainees had a statutory -- legal but not constitutional -- right to contest their indefinite detention before an independent judge, a legal process known as habeas corpus.

But, urged by the Bush administration, Congress in 2006 passed new legislation that forbade them from seeking justice in a federal court until they are judged by a special military tribunal.

It was not immediately clear how Thursday's ruling would affect those 270 detainees still held in the jail.

Australian David Hicks is the only "war on terror" detainee to have so far been sentenced at Guantanamo after pleading guilty in a deal with US authorities which allowed him to serve out the remaining nine months of his sentence at home.

The most important trial of five alleged suspects in the September 11, 2001 attacks is not due to get fully underway until the summer, after they were read the charges against them at a hearing last week.

The first detainee who could be affected is Yemeni Salim Hamdan, accused of being the driver and personal bodyguard of the leader of the Al-Qaeda terror network, Osama bin Laden.

An initial appeal by Hamdan led to the 2006 Supreme Court decision, and his lawyers have already filed an appeal to a Washington court which was awaiting the Supreme Court decision before taking up the case.

Since the camp was opened in January 2002 to deal with the suspects rounded up in the US "war on terror" it has under gone major changes.

Two-thirds of the 800 prisoners who have passed through its barbed-wire gates have been freed, mostly without charge, after several years in captivity.

But the remaining prisoners are often held in solitary confinement, allowed little contact with their families and the outside world, and have no certainty about their fate.

Four detainees have committed suicide, and hunger strikes are frequent, leading to the force feeding of prisoners by their military guards.

The initial open air cages, which triggered a storm of international criticism, have long been emptied and today have returned to grass and the native iguanas.

And most of the prisoners, even those which the US authorities have said could be freed, are now housed in modern cells modeled on those in US high-security jails.

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.

The White House has also repeatedly said it would shut Guantanamo down, but has failed so far to come with an alternative, or to find countries willing to take some prisoners, such as Muslim Uighurs from northwest China, who face repression at home. - Drudge Report

What the heck! This is BS! Where in the constitution does it say that Prisoners of war have the same rights as American Citizens! The men in Women in uniform fight and die for our freedom! Not the enemy's freedom! This shows the lack of understanding of the constitution by the Supreme Court and the congress. Sometimes I wonder if they have all used there only copy's of the constitution as toilet paper. I swear If Our founding fathers would come back from the dead and see how the Libra l's and big government have hijacked this great nation! Our founding fathers would start a civil war against this liberals. Don't believe me! Just look at gas prices! The Price of gas before Liberals took control of the congress was $2.15 a gallon! How much is it now! $4.00 a gallon! why because it is the liberals and environmentalist are stopping us from producing more oil.

I call on everyone to call there congress men! Flood there lines and tell them how pissed you are! Tell them to stop destroying this great nation.

Sunday, June 1, 2008

Reasons why we should not Abandon the Mission in Iraq.

It seems that the War in Iraq has been one of the hot topics between the Political Candidates. Should We Stay? Should We Go? Was this war just to begin with? Well I am going to give you 10 reasons as to why we should stay and not abandon the mission.

Reason 1:

We have already put many resources into Iraq. This war has cost us alot, so why not see a return in this investment.

Reason 2:

If we pull out before we can secure Iraq what do think is going happen? Total chaos, the conquest of South Vietnam will not compare to what will happen to Iraq with the excitations, warlords, and just everything going to hell. you think the civilian casualty rate is bad now? It will be nothing compared to what will happen if we pull out now. the level of bloodshed and horror will rival the massacres of Darfur. We then would have to return back to Iraq to face a deadlier enemy than today.

Reason 3:

We are making progress in this war. The U.S army is getting more bold with its operations. The troop surge and the awaking movement made by some Sunni tribes has pushed down attacks, and we are forcing the terrorists to make more drastic action. A example would be using mentally disabled people in suicide attacks.

Reason 4:

the Iraq government and military are shaping up. The Iraq prime ministers recent stance against the militias has shown growing confidence

Reason 5:

It is just the right thing to do. Many Iraqis are counting on us. We owe it to the Iraqi citizens to finish what we started and not abandon them. We have a legal responsibility under the Fourth Geneva convention. The consequences of just quitting and pulling our troops out are unacceptable.

Reason 6:

We would lose the respect of our friends (those friends who see radical Islam as a threat as well as those around the world who do but are afraid to speak up for fear of murder or political correctness and we would lose the respect of our enemies. They would see us as being weak.

Reason 7:

Broken promises. The reason the Iraqis have been so fearful of supporting the US efforts, is because we have a history of breaking promises with countries and governments we have pledged to support. If we pull out, we are breaking our promises made to the bulk of the Iraqi citizens. The more we break our promises, the less credibility we will have, and the more we will become the image of the Ugly American and be more hated than ever.

Reason 8:

Terrorists will make maximum advantage of the propaganda value of our "defeat". And yes, it will be viewed as defeat. What else could we call it? More men and children will be recruited in the name of Allah. A base of operations will be forever secured by Islam extremists. We will be in for the worst era of Hell that we have ever faced. The chance of Iraq coming to its senses may not be 100% if we stay, but the chance of it becoming a decent place to live if we leave is 0%.

Reason 9:

Pulling out of Iraq would also reward the liberal media, giving it power that it does not deserve. The media is the influences of opinion, but they do not fairly represent the values of the majority of the American people. The media are by their own admission left-leaning.

Reason 10:

Lets face it! EVERYONE agreed that Saddam Hussein’s government should be toppled. Whether or not they had a nuclear programs is still academic. Although it appears that they did not have nukes, the were saying they did, destabilizing and bullying their neighbors. They also most certainly had a dangerous contingent of chemical and biological weapons; The only reason plausible that they were not used on us is that we would have probably nuked the country into oblivion. Deterrence by a position of strength. The USA under mandate by the a dozen broken UN resolutions by Iraq already gave us all the world-legal reasons to invade. Now, for political divisiveness, to help manipulate public opinion, politicians in Washington are reversing their positions to help throw the elections in their favor. They keep saying the last election gave them a mandate to "get out of Iraq". I don't understand. I don't believe the American people are chicken-hearted, short-thinking pansy’s , who are incapable of supporting professional troops who have chosen the honor of fighting for freedom and even dying if necessary. Why would you join the armed forces voluntarily, knowing that its purpose is to make war, if you hadn't first considered your own mortality?

After you read these 10 reasons as to why we should stay in Iraq I want you to think if it was your country? what if America was Iraq... what if we didn’t have the freedoms to do what we do everyday….what if our children were exploited and our family members killed because they didn’t agree... wouldn’t you want someone to come and help you? And if they did come and help you.... think of how you would feel if they just got up and left and everything went back to the way it was like they were never there in the first place...wouldn’t you feel the next time someone thinks that the war is pointless and idiotic just imagine if you weren’t one of the lucky American citizens in this world but you were one of them. Just imagine if you were waiting for a hero but then your hero decided your life just wasn’t worth it......

God Bless!