And Justice for All

Newsweek ^ | 08/19/02 | Michael Isikof

[KDD]

Word spread quickly through the Charleston Naval Station last June: a big-time terrorist was headed for the brig. An entire wing of the base

[KDD]

Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.

[KDD]

Under the Soviet Unions "Commitee for State Security", thousands of Russians disapeared into the black holes of the Soviets prison system. Why would we go down that road?

[thepitts]

Carefull what you say, lest you disapear.

[KDD]

The whole world is watching... LOL.

[meenie]

The war on terrorism is fast becoming the war on Constitutional protections. Surely they have enough evidence to bring charges and maintain some pretense of the rule of law. This rule of dictatorial edict is not in the tradition of America.

[Dr. Thorne]

Yeah... poor Jose. I say we release him... in your neighborhood.

[ohioman]

I think Meannie and KDD should both share the cost of placing Padilla into their homes. I mean, we wouldn't want to offend a terrorist would we?

[thepitts]

Yeah... poor Jose. I say we release him... in your neighborhood.

Or better yet, how about just charging him with the crimes he may have commited? Thus giving him the opportunity to clear his name or be found guilty.

[KDD]

Faced with a deadline last week to justify the detention of another U.S.-born enemy combatant, Yaser Esam Hamdi, Justice Department lawyers told a federal judge that he didn’t have the right to review the material.

Who needs judicial oversight? Who needs constitutional protections? I hope not some radical right winger posting about constitutional liberty on some right wing website somewhere. Enemy of the State? Such an Orwellian concept...like Gulag Rikers Island.

[Restorer]

Which is why it may take the Supreme Court to ultimately answer that nagging question: can they do that?

Please note this sentence.

Despite possible administration claims to the contrary, anybody with sense knows that the Supremes will ultimately rule on the constitutionality of this procedure, if only by refusing to take the appeal.

[KDD]

That's what I heard about the unconstitutional campaign finance laws signed by this administration.

Still waiting.

Besides they've already told one Federal Judge to shove it.

[Restorer]

The Supremes will rule on whether these detentions are constitutional. Whatever they decide, not everybody will agree. But we won't have a constitutional crisis till the administration defies a Supreme Court decision. Up until that point, claims that they are not subject to judicial review are just posturing.

Anyway, what the Supremes will rule on is not whether any particular case is justified. It's whether the Pres really does have the powers he claims to detain suspects.

[Cold Heat]

The goverment(Ashcroft), is only doing what it can to disrupt any potential plans that may have been in process after 9/11.

Are some peoples rights being ignored?...................Yes.

Are middle eastern males planning to hurt or kill Americans when given the opportunity?.....................Yes.

Would everyone now criticizing Ashcroft for being too tough jump on the band wagon of people citicizing him for being too soft if something happened?...........Absolutely!

Moral of story.........................A ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. IMHO

[KDD]

Moral of story.........................A ounce of prevention

Is that what you think?

How much of your freedom would you give up for a pound of prevention?

[Cold Heat]

How much of your freedom would you give up for a pound of prevention?

Hard to quantify freedom, but I feel that I have lost more in the last 10 years then I could ever give up to fight terror when there was no crisis.(another subject to peruse)

However, yes I would make a sacrifice if I felt it was needed and I trusted the people who would be in temporary custody of it. If I lost faith with those people I WOULD IMMEDIATELY ASK FOR IT BACK.

I believe that this is your problem. You cannot trust. I understand why.