Gitmo Prisoners have Habeas Corpus Rights.

[Yuwipi Woman]

I'd better be careful, or he'll put me on ignore again. I wonder what he'd do if I talked like this, and actually lived somewhere near him?

I couldn't get so lucky as to have Big Al put me on ignore.

BTW, how's the weather up there? Its a "bit damp" around here.

 

[likesfish]

gitmo was a bad idea badly badly executed there are people there who are innocent picked up for bounty.
there are also dangerous fuckwits there who deserve all they get as well

 

[Aldebaran]

I have yet to see wealth of that level that wasn't gained in a morally questionable way. Most wealth such as that is gained by the rich hitching the poor to the plow. Quite frankly, I have little respect for rich arrogant twats, either you or George W.

Why don't you start a thread on it. By the way, I'm richer than that lowlife. Now go outside and punch a tree or something to get rid of your frustration.

I did not start the "oldest instruments" thread, I merely read it and noted your post. To say that I had "hidden motives" in posting it is a bit bizarre since I did not post it and it presupposes some sort of psychic understanding of what you would post to it that I don't possess.

Whatever. You certainly had weird motives from the first reply you posted there to me and you certainly can't get rid of them, proof your posts here (and in some other thread, if I recall well) about the same.

If you don't want to read my posts, simply put me on ignore. It exists for that very reason. But don't expect me not to read and comment on things freely posted by yourself on this board.

Your obsession is far too amusing.
Please continue.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

Isn't the fact that you owned a violin or banjo or what have you, a 'detail of your personal life'?

You did post about it, didn't you?

Would that mean you posted 'details of your personal life'?

Just asking.

No it would mean going along with the tread's OP. A violin is not my personal life although I cherish it because I got it from my late mother, because I am in love with its sound and because I play it since I was five. That is the value it has for me.

I'd better be careful, or he'll put me on ignore again.

You can always ask for it.

I wonder what he'd do if I talked like this, and actually lived somewhere near him?

Very doubtful I would talk to you if you uttered such idiocies.

salaam.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I guess you don't understand how close to the brink the US was getting re the constitution and civil rights. With the rest of us marching behind in lockstep to lesser or greater degree.

I'm sorry, but if this, a legal decision regarding a situation that's being swept under the carpet anyway that let people be imprisoned without trial and tortured for six years is meant to convince me that "the system works", it isn't doing a very good job. Let's not even get into all of the other things that the system allowed in that time and that this won't affect.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Why don't you start a thread on it. By the way, I'm richer than that lowlife. Now go outside and punch a tree or something to get rid of your frustration.

How odd that you think a violent reaction is somehow normal. Do you punch trees a lot?

Personally, while I'm no longer a practicing Buddhist (or any religion), I do think that my vows of not harming any living being still stand. Perhaps you should try it.

Whatever. You certainly had weird motives from the first reply you posted there to me and you certainly can't get rid of them, proof your posts here (and in some other thread, if I recall well) about the same.

You asked about my motives. I've explicitly explained them.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

A violin is not my personal life although I cherish it because I got it from my late mother, because I am in love with its sound and because I play it since I was five. That is the value it has for me.

Don't you think a hospital wing named in her honor would be a better monument to her memory?

 

[Aldebaran]

Don't you think that I am old enough to decide to which causes, research, developments & charities I contribute?
A violin has nothing to do with any of that. Why are you so focused on that poor thing?

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

How odd that you think a violent reaction is somehow normal. Do you punch trees a lot?

Pu!nching on a punching bag is hardly violent. I proposed a tree because if you punch that one, all energy you otherwise put in anger and frustration gets directly diverted in reparing the damage done at you knuckles. Trees don't mind to help you with that.

Personally, while I'm no longer a practicing Buddhist (or any religion), I do think that my vows of not harming any living being still stand. Perhaps you should try it.

I'm not a vegetarian, but I do actively participate in prevention of harming all what lives - and doesn't live - on this planet.

You asked about my motives. I've explicitly explained them.

No you didn't.

salaam.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I couldn't get so lucky as to have Big Al put me on ignore.

BTW, how's the weather up there? Its a "bit damp" around here.

It's been the shits. We've had the heat on twice in the last week. Nice today, though.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

No it would mean going along with the tread's OP. A violin is not my personal life although I cherish it because I got it from my late mother, because I am in love with its sound and because I play it since I was five. That is the value it has for me.

.

These are more details of your personal life.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

You can always ask for it.


.

Whatever for? Whether or not you read my words, is of no consequence.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I'm sorry, but if this, a legal decision regarding a situation that's being swept under the carpet anyway that let people be imprisoned without trial and tortured for six years is meant to convince me that "the system works", it isn't doing a very good job. Let's not even get into all of the other things that the system allowed in that time and that this won't affect.

To repeat, I don't think you have an understanding of the magnitude of the possible consequences from the changes wrought by the Bush admin.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

To repeat, I don't think you have an understanding of the magnitude of the possible consequences from the changes wrought by the Bush admin.

The consequences would be worse than allowing people to be imprisoned and tortured on an ad-hoc basis on the word of the administration? I suppose there wasn't that much summary execution - well, not within US territory anyway - so it could be worse.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The consequences would be worse than allowing people to be imprisoned and tortured on an ad-hoc basis on the word of the administration? I suppose there wasn't that much summary execution - well, not within US territory anyway - so it could be worse.

The relationship between the citizen and the state, in modern democracies, has habeas corpus as one of its foundation building blocks. Gitmo was one of the first steps taken by the Bush admin leading to an erosion of that foundation.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

In spite of any ambivalence about the necessity of detaining terrorists etc, Gitmo was the thing that arose out of 911 that frightened me most.

I most certainly don't want to be blown up in some terminal by terrorists, but I am much more afraid of the power of the state unfettered by our traditional rights and protections, protections that have taken much time and blood to instal.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

The relationship between the citizen and the state, in modern democracies, has habeas corpus as one of its foundation building blocks. Gitmo was one of the first steps taken by the Bush admin leading to an erosion of that foundation.

That's gone. That went when they were allowed to do it, and a finger-wagging by the Supreme Court now, when it's politically appropriate and the system doesn't really want to carry it on due to negative publicity from other sources, means nothing.

Protestors, civil liberties groups, bloggers, media have all had far more impact on this issue than the official system has - the Supreme Court is just a final rubber stamp based on the impact of public opinion. The official system failed. This is just it saying to itself "yeah, maybe we should stop now, people aren't too happy".

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

That's gone. That went when they were allowed to do it, and a finger-wagging by the Supreme Court now, when it's politically appropriate and the system doesn't really want to carry it on due to negative publicity from other sources, means nothing.

Protestors, civil liberties groups, bloggers, media have all had far more impact on this issue than the official system has - the Supreme Court is just a final rubber stamp based on the impact of public opinion. The official system failed. This is just it saying to itself "yeah, maybe we should stop now, people aren't too happy".

No offence, but you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Were Roe v Wade, or Brown v Board of Education, just rubber stamps?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

No offence, but you don't know what you're talking about.

No offence, but you really don't have the first clue here, and also you smell.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

No offence, but you really don't have the first clue here, and also you smell.

Of Axe, maybe.

Politics, rights etc are a game of years. Last week's protest group will not be here in fifteen years, but the decision handed down by the Supreme Court will be binding on the administration that exists at that time. The power of judicial decisions is built by a process of accretion.

Can the admin disregard the court? It can, to an extent, and for a limited time. Should it do so for an extended time, the US as it is now, will change into something unrecognizable. Don't forget that the judiciary is one of the three branches of govt, with the admin and the executive being the other two. None of the three can be ignored by the others, without fundamentally altering the system.

Don't forget that the prez is sworn into office by the Chief Justice.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

This is rather comical window-dressing stuff. The administration has been for a good six years, and is still, able to imprison and torture people without trial on its own say-so. They did it. It was obvious. Nothing happened.

Now that it is not politically expedient any more, rubber-stamping occurs to pretend that that particular instance has been stopped by the law rather than anything else. Entirely coincidentally of course.

The answer to your other post by the way is "yes". Neither just popped out of nowhere.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

This is rather comical window-dressing stuff. The administration has been for a good six years, and is still, able to imprison and torture people without trial on its own say-so. They did it. It was obvious. Nothing happened.

Now that it is not politically expedient any more, rubber-stamping occurs to pretend that that particular instance has been stopped by the law rather than anything else. Entirely coincidentally of course.

The answer to your other post by the way is "yes". Neither just popped out of nowhere.

The administration has tremendous power. That it was able to hold off the court for six years attests to that. Also, as I said earlier, before the court goes about the business of naysaying such a powerful institution, it must get its tackle in order, as it were.

And you call it window dressing. You said earlier, that it didn't matter, really. Well, the next prez won't be sworn in till next January, and I doubt that the first order of business, without this court directive, would have been to free the gitmo prisoners, so you can tell the prisoners that another two or three years of incarceration without rights, really doesn't matter that much.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Or, alternatively, the Supreme Court part of the system exists to rubber-stamp situations where the administration part of the system's decision is no longer paramount, when imprisoning and torturing people is causing more trouble than it's worth.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Or, alternatively, the Supreme Court part of the system exists to rubber-stamp situations where the administration part of the system's decision is no longer paramount, when imprisoning and torturing people is causing more trouble than it's worth.

Why do you think there are such monumental battles fought when it comes time to instal a new justice on the Supreme Court?

It's because presidents see it as a chance to affect policy for years to come after the ends of their terms, by installing someone of consonant political beliefs. A conservative Court will not be rubber stamping the actions of a Democratic govt, any more than a liberal court rubber stamps the actions of a Republican, conservative govt.

Brown v Board of Education came down in 1954, a decision of the Warren Court, a liberal court that existed during a conservative time.

To the surprise of many, Warren was a much more liberal justice than had been anticipated. As a result, President Eisenhower is perhaps apocryphally said to have remarked that nominating Warren for the Chief Justice seat was "the biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made."[12] Warren was able to craft a long series of landmark decisions including:

Brown v. Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954), which banned the segregation of public schools;
the "one man, one vote" cases of 1962–1964, which dramatically altered the relative power of rural regions in many states;
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), which held that the Sixth Amendment required that indigent non-capital criminal defendants receive publicly-funded counsel (the law to that point requiring the assignment of free counsel only to indigent capital defendants);
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), which required that certain rights of a person being interrogated while in police custody be clearly explained, including the right to an attorney (often called the "Miranda warning").

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Warren#The_Warren_Court

 

[Aldebaran]

It's because presidents see it as a chance to affect policy for years to come after the ends of their terms, by installing someone of consonant political beliefs.

Typical example of the failure of US'ers to understand the true meaning and intend of democracy (past the Athenian experiment, that is).
They live in a quasi dictatorship - build on and underscored by Corporate Capitalism - and are brainwashed in believing they are "free".

salaam.

 

[Malamud]

Typical example of the failure of US'ers to understand the true meaning and intend of democracy (past the Athenian experiment, that is).

JC is not a US'er.

 

[Aldebaran]

As he says, but nevertheless his posts show he is a fervent supporter of the USA.

salaam.

 

[Malamud]

As he says, but nevertheless his posts show he is a fervent supporter of the USA.

salaam.

I read his posts very differently.

 

[Fruitloop]

Wrongly then, and not for very long either.