Thursday, June 12, 2008

pissed at the High Court.

G'day Everyone!

In just a few hours time for me, I'll be making my first entrance into the real political life. I got elected to be a part of the local Republican Committee board last May '08's elections and tonight is the first meeting. I can't wait but I will be amazed to see how they react to having a deaf person on the board. I've been called, emailed, and snail mailed to of being asked to vote someone in to be an officer on the board. I'm playing my decision close to my vest and that's perhaps the best idea.

Sadly to say.. I wish I changed to Democratic party already. (the local political office lost my papers and that's too late now). But figured, if I can help the republican party locally, then things just might work well. I'm not too happy about John McCain. But he's just not one of the best ideas for this country.

Meanwhile, When I read today's news on CNN : http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/12/scotus/index.html
I have asked myself a question: Can it get any worse for those doddering old fools? Who in their right minds would put men and women on a high court bench to be so OLD and STUPID?
Just as Justice Antonin Scalia said best today : The "nation will live to regret what the court has done today," . He was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

What has really transpired of this High Court Ruling that said that these DANGEROUS Terror Suspects have LEGAL RIGHTS to by-pass the military court and are allowed to come in to USA and challenge the military on grounds that their legal detention is illegal.
That's like to say: "We agree that these men and women of different countries are enemies, but we must give them due process.".

Thanks to the Supreme Court. These enemy terrorists have just been given a new power to tie up the courts for years with their endless terror of legal challenges. This Supreme Court has just created a new political mind field for themselves and in doing this, the majority of the justices ought to be told to step down and resign from the Supreme Court.

The military won't be grabbing any more enemy combatants in the field of war. The military is most likely going to be ordered to SHOOT TO KILL now, more than ever.

In the end, I think the nation would be better off if the power of appointment to the Supreme Court was taken away from the President and put in the hands of voters. That way the justices would be facing the vote just like every other political candidate. But their term ought to be limited to just 4 years instead of a life long job security of what they have now.

Our nation WILL SUFFER what this Supreme Court has done. But it will NOT help our nation at this point of our economic crisis. How much political fall out this will become, grab the pop corn and sit back. The summer drama has just begun.

6 comments:

Deaf Wheeler said...

I agree what you had said and it ridicious to see how justices think on human rights espically when it come to war, Hello we are at war...we need somebody to end the war like Winston Churchill was in charge of many battles and defeat them. Where are these strong men like Winston Churchill? that a question we need to consider when Barack Obama select his vice president and I am hearing rumors that there more likely he will hire someone who is retired veteran.

Michael said...

I could not agree more with you or Scalia. The nation will live to regret it.
I must admit, I have had my doubts lately whether our constitutional republic would survive to regret many decisions made since 2001.
The casual disregard for the foundations of our national ideology of liberty and due process is made pathetic as it is used to justify permanent war against Middle Eastern trailer trash.
Subjecting Federal judges to elections will subvert the constitution. So many times the popular decision is the wrong one (e.g. Dred Scott) and so many unpopular ones are right ( e.g. Loving v. Virginia, Brown v. Board of Education).

Sherlock rocks!

George said...

The whole point of lifetime appointments is to help make justices immune to politics.

Kennedy's swing vote is a perfect example of this. He weighed the issue and then came down with a decision that he felt was RIGHT, not politically beneficial to him.

Would you really want someone out campaigning instead of deliberating? Our founding fathers weren't stupid, you know.

So let's get this straight:

1) You support the abolition of Due Process.

2) You support judges bending to the whims of politics rather than upholding CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

3) You wish to rewrite the Constitution in order to undermine the power and influence of one of the three branches of our government.

Do you believe in America at all?

And I don't mean the strip-mall wastelands and reality TV tripe that passes for American culture these days.

I mean the PRINCIPLE of America. What we stand for... Our system of goverment... Our core values... etc...

Re-read what you wrote, but replace the words "dangerous terror suspects" with "Christians" or "Gays" or "Blacks". Get the point? We are a nation of LAWS, not men. Do you know what that means? It means we don't make one set of laws for people we like and another set of laws for people we don't like.

There is ONE set of laws. Period. And they apply to EVERYBODY. Period. Including "dangerous terror SUSPECTS". Yes, even actual "dangerous terrorists" too.

If you truly love America, then you need to re-evaluate your thinking.

I don't agree with every High Court ruling either. But I certainly wouldn't agree with "throwing the old farts out" every time they come down with a ruling I disagree with.

Your problem is that you're looking at this decision along political lines, not legal ones. We pay the Justices to weigh the LEGALITY of an issue, not the political mood of the public. The Supreme Court doesn't take a poll before rendering a decision, and that's exactly what would happen if people were foolish to listen to someone like you.

I honestly find it reprehensible that someone would consider fundamentally re-writing the Constitution--our most sacred national document and one that has stood the test of time for over 200 years--just because they want to feel "safe".

Well, I'm sorry that the world is a big scary place, but we've got nobody to blame for that but ourselves. Fifty years of unilateral Cold War policies (by BOTH political parties) that victimized smaller countries for the sake of "national interest" has engendered a lot of hatred out there.

While we went about our business in our nice big comfortable house (mostly ignorant of what was going on "out there"), our big guard dog (our government) was running amok around the neighborhood digging up other people's yards and biting them whenever they complained.

How long do you think a situation like that can last without a backlash? Study your Middle Eastern history before you open your mouth about it. Do you really think Iran would be building nukes to protect itself from us if it didn't have GOOD REASON?? Do you think the Iranians should just bend over and let us install another brutal puppet dictator (like the Shah)? Do you think the Iranians should just grin and bear it when we push neighboring dictators (like Saddam) to invade and wage a brutal 10-year war against them?

You can brush off my statements as "America-hating" if you want. After all, that's the response your favorite pundits have instructed you to parrot whenever someone presents FACTS that refute your paper-thin arguments.

But on the contrary, I LOVE America. And more importantly, I LOVE the Constitution that made America the greatest country in human history.

Unlike you, I don't think it should be chucked in the dustbin just because a bunch of Saudis and Egyptians knocked down a few office buildings in New York.

Unlike you, I think the thousands of soldiers who died in WWII (protecting our nation from the kind of fascism that occurs when a country allows the LAW to bend to political whims), deserve better.

I'm willing to give "dangerous terrorist SUSPECTS" rights because that's EXACTLY WHAT THIS COUNTRY STANDS FOR!!!

Go read the Constitution and if you don't like it, MOVE.

In fact, I know of a country that elects some of its judges to its Supreme Court: Cambodia.

Why not move there? After all, they have such a lovely record of respect for human rights and the RULE OF LAW. No need to worry about another Pol Pot coming along, because that elected judiciary is there to protect your "rights"!

Do I want to see dangerous terrorists freed on technicalities? NO. Of course not. But if they are freed it'll be the Bush Adminstation's fault, not the judiciary's fault. If a cop plants evidence or forces a confession, then the cop is doing a BAD job of upholding the LAW.

Bush threw a bunch of people in jail for six years without giving them due process.

That.
Is.
Against.
The.
LAW!

It's the job of the executive branch to uphold the law, ALL LAWS. Even the ones that are politically or militarily inconvenient. Sure, he needed to put those bad people in jail. Nobody disputes that. But he needed to do it LEGALLY. And that he didn't do. So this mess is his fault.

So no, I don't want to see terrorists go free. But I do want to see them get DUE PROCESS, because I'm an American, and I actually BELIEVE in the principles that America stands for.

You. Don't.

Sherlock Steve said...

Well, let me clear up one thing. I don't hate america or the due process.
But when we give (via high court rulings) terror suspects more rights than the average American Citizen gets on a day that they get arrested, then these justices have just pratically said : "Come in front of these American Military people. Surrender We'll arrest you. You can terrorize american courts with your lawsuits after they grab you for the military justice while getting all the time to pray in your cell and having 3 good meals a day".

That's why I believe now, on the battle field of war against terrorism, they'll shoot terror people first and then ask questions later.

Since the intellegence of the High Court has gone south, so has our country under Bush.

Jim said...

I have to say I agree with the Supereme Court Decision. Why? Well here is another question that has not been answaer for 6 years, why hasn't the military court been open to try those prisoners at
Guantanamo Bay (GB) in Cuba? If it takes them this long and the prisoner never gets their day in court, do I know they are all guilty of the crime? Do I know they are all terrorist? Some of them were probably brainwash or force to join the terrorist group to protect their families.

They deserve Due Process and have their day in court so we know if they are guilty or not. Image being in prison for a crime for 6 years and has not gone to court for the crime?

It is not that I don't support them but I am saying they are human being and deserve to have their rights to have their day in court. I am tired of paying for GB with my tax payer money if there are some that are innocent.

It is sad they are being mistreated simply because they are muslim and use the Quran Bible. That is their choices to waht they want to believe in. We can't force them to change. We shouldn't be beating them up as that is not a Christian thing to do. God never taught us to beat other people up if they have not yet harm us.

I would think twice if I was in the prisoner shoes because I would be sitting around and never had my day in court for 6 years. What if I am innocence and was brainwash. Do I deserve the harsh punishment without my day in court for the crime? I don't think I do as after all I am a human being.

Just think about it and think about what I am saying about being in prison and never had a day in court to prove I am guilty or not for the crime.

I am for the prisoner to have their day in court because I would feel better knowing justice has be done right and would work faster to close GB Prison once the last prisoner had their day in court.

George said...

Your reply clears nothing up because you contradict yourself.

First you say you "don't hate due process", but then you say we should "shoot

first and ask questions later". That, by the way, is the OPPOSITE of Due

Process!!

This isn't about giving terror suspects MORE rights than Americans, that's right

-wing propaganda, don't buy into it. And this isn't even about giving terror

suspects the SAME rights as Americans. Again, that's more propaganda. The

talking-heads want you to believe that "bleeding heart liberals" want to turn

Guantanamo Bay into a Club Med for Islamic mass-murderers. You should ask

yourself why they are so insistent on demonizing "the Left" (and why the Left is

so insistent on demonizing the Right).

Pundits don't give a damn about anything except their own RATINGS. If they turn

American politics into a polarized, bunkered-down wasteland, they don't care,

just so long as their "side" wins.

Meanwhile, American ideals and values get flushed down the toilet in the name of

posturing and self-agrandizing nonsense.

NOBODY wants terror suspects to go free without a FAIR trial, but that doesn't

mean that advocates of "fair justice" are "soft on crime". They just want to see

the GUILTY people get punished!

And even in a case where guilt is seemingly self-evident, a trial is still

valuable because it is a public airing of the "truth". For example, we all know

that Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy, but without a trial we'll never know for

certain if he acted alone. Forty years of conspiracy theory nonsense revolving

around the Kennedy assassination proves the value of PUBLIC trials and also

proves the STUPIDITY of attempts to "keep secrets".

NOBODY wants convicted TERRORISTS (note the difference between that word and

terror "SUSPECTS") to have an easy time in jail. However, we DO have a concept

in this country called, "innocent until PROVEN guilty". We also have

prohibitions against "cruel and unusual punishment" in this country as well.

Treating BAD PEOPLE with dignity isn't about being "soft on crime", it's about

RETAINING OUR OWN HUMANITY AND DIGNITY! It isn't about THEM, it's about US. How

we treat our prisoners (especially the ones we really don't like!!) says a lot

about us as a country. Nations that torture and abuse prisoners have the worst

sort of leadership and the United States has unfortunately joined that nefarious

club.

Honestly, how can we snub our noses at brutal African dictators when our own

people are waterboarding SUSPECTS for information (and forced confessions)?? How

can we take the moral high ground against nations like China?? All the Chinese

have to do now is label Tibetan dissidents as "enemy combatants" and they can

justify every abuse as "just doing things the American way".

So question: If you believe in the fundamental values of American Justice (about

which, of course, the Supreme Court most certainly knows A LOT), then how can you

possibly be against the notion of terror SUSPECTS getting their day in Court?

It is the LAW.

Oh, and by the way, the role of the Executive Branch is to ENFORCE the law, not

INTERPRET or CREATE it. So the Bush Administration is WAY out of bounds on this

issue.

What kind of signal does it send to the rest of the world when our own chief

executive does an end-run around our CORE principles and laws?!?! The next time

someone claims that America is the "Leader of the Free World", most people in

other countries are going to scoff at the blatant hypocrisy of that statement.

The "battlefield" of the war on terrorism isn't fought on a battlefield at all.

That's your first big mistake. This so-called "war" is fought within society

itself. There is NO BATTLEFIELD.

These "terror suspects" are often pulled out of cities and towns. Yes, many of

them are no doubt guilty of bad things, but many others are also picked up on

"suspicions" or "tips" which may or may not be valid. THAT is what trials are

for!! To weed those few innocent people out of the system so we can properly

punish the truly BAD people.

How would you like to be a Pakistani-American right now? Imagine someone with

full US Citizenship, a decent job, a family, and in all respects a law-abiding,

America-loving PATRIOT. Now imagine the fear that guy faces every time he gets

on an airplane. Will he get profiled? What if some random college roommate from

15 years ago shows up on a watch list? Will he be carted off to some black hole

for questioning too??

During WWII, thousands of Japanese Americans were "interned" in prison camps

simply because some bastards from another country bombed a naval base half a

world away. Many of those families had been living in America for GENERATIONS.

Many families had probably been in America longer than some of the sons-of-Ellis

-Island who were inprisoning them. Yet, because they "LOOKED" like the enemy,

they got TREATED like the enemy.

Those people were AMERICAN CITIZENS. Yet they got no trial and the

administration-in-charge trampled on the Constitution in the name of "national

security". Sound familiar? Oh, and by the way, some enterprising California

"businessmen" took the Japanese internment as an opportunity to seize land,

personal property, and businesses from those people. That's THEFT. Since when

is government-sanctioned theft a necessary part of protecting national security?

Now you can say, "Oh that was 1940, things were different then and that situation

doesn't apply now", but you'd be WRONG. First, just because it happened 60 years

ago doesn't mean it's irrelevent. Laws are written to last for decades and

centuries, not the whim of the moment. The Constitution was written 200+ years

ago, is it irrelevent? Secondly, Japan and Germany were much more formidable

foes than al Qeda, so if internment camps are WRONG even in the face of such dire

adversaries as the Axis Powers, then they are most DEFINITELY WRONG when faced

with a ragtag group of religious extremists and mercenary thugs.

So the Supreme Court's decision isn't about "protecting the rights of

terrorists", that's BULL. The Supreme Court's decision is about protecting the

rights of those law-abiding Muslim Americans who THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN,

just happen to LOOK like our current enemy. The Supreme Court is saying to the

Bush Administration: "Look, this isn't Cuba or Chile, you can't just throw people

down a black hole because you SUSPECT them of wrong-doing. You have to PROVE it

first."

Millions of law-abiding Americas are probably breathing a sigh of relief. You

can't understand it because you aren't Muslim, but Guantanamo Bay and the WWII

Japanese Internment Camps are a source of great fear for our PATRIOTIC Muslim

CITIZENS. They look at things like that and wonder, "how long will it be before

there's a knock at my door and I get carted away like a criminal?"

They fear for their families, their jobs, their homes, and their safety. It HAS

happened before and it CAN happen again, and that is WHY we have a judicial

branch to CHECK the power of an over-reaching executive branch.

National security is NOT an excuse to break the law!!! Especially for the

President!!

al Qeda is not--and never should have been considered--"enemy combatants". That

"elevates" their cause too much and gives them too much credit. Yes, they can

blow their whole wad and knock down an office building or two, but they are NOT a

threat to America or our way of life. WE are a threat to our own way of life if

we surrender too many of our rights and freedoms for the sake of safety.

al Qeda is NOT a worthy opponent for our military and it is demeaning to our

military forces to force them to act like beat cops. al Qeda is not a nation-

state, it is not a political group, and it is not LEGITIMATE in any way, shape or

form. It is a MAFIA run by thugs, murderers and meglomaniacs.

It was STUPID to call them "enemy combatants" and to sic the US Army on them. It

elevates them in the eyes of many people and gives them a legitimacy that they

NEVER had before (after all, they were OUR proxies in Afghanistan before, so why

would an America-hating radical rally to al Qeda's banner given that bin Laden's

family was LIVING IN AMERICA at the time?). Just like Voldemort marked Harry

Potter as his equal, we MADE al Qeda a real threat by treating them like one.

We should have called them a bunch of low-life criminals and then sic'd the FBI,

CIA, and Interpol on them (while our Marines kicked the crap out of the Taliban

because the Taliban WAS a legit political group, and therefore worthy of a butt-

kicking courtesy of the Marines).

Osama bin Laden is nothing more than a Al Capone style serial killer with

delusions of grandeur. But because of some bogeyman holed up in a cave in

Pakistan, YOU want to sacrifice the civil rights of American citizens (especially

Muslim ones) HERE, by writing the Bush Adminstration a blank check and then

looking the other way when they cash it.

There is no such thing as a "war on terror", that's a classic bit of Orwellian

double-speak. A never-ending "war" that is used to justify all sorts of civil

rights abuses on the homefront.

There are bad people who mean to do us harm, no doubt, but they are CRIMINALS,

not "enemy combatants". And in AMERICA, the home of the FREE and the BRAVE, we

do not cowardly cave into fear and sacrifice our freedom and our principles for

the ILLUSION of safety!

We acknowledge that the world is a scary place and then we BRAVELY UPHOLD OUR

PRINCIPLES ANYWAY. We give criminal SUSPECTS rights because it is the RIGHT

thing to do! We treat ALL prisoners with dignity because we are a CIVILIZED

people!

We are supposed to be a BEACON of freedom. The Statue of Liberty holds her touch

UP, not OUT.