Scalia Passes Judgment On Guantanamo In Advance

News:
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is scheduled to hear arguments this week, along with the rest of the high court, on whether to allow the Bush administration to mount a kangaroo court for the detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, rather than try them according to established American, international, or even military law. Scalia, for one, can take that day off, as he’s apparently already made up his mind. During a talk earlier this month at the University of Freiberg, the Justice made it abundantly clear that he considers the rights afforded by the Geneva convention (and numerous international human rights accords)—let alone the civil rights provided for in the U.S. Constitution—to be quaint relics of the past. The thrust of Scalia's rationale was that his son is a soldier, and he wants anyone who might have shot at him to rot in a detention camp. It’s clear that if this week’s case is to have any semblance of legitimacy, Scalia must join Chief Justice John Roberts in recusing himself; it’s just as clear that he has no intention of doing so.

Comments

(6)

And we all thought Alito was bad.

I sure hope Cheney takes this guy with him on his next quail-hunting trip.

It’s truly frightening that this clown who calls himself a Supreme Court Justice feels that he can thumb his nose at the concept of a fair, impartial judiciary. To blatantly and publicly issue a pre-judgment on a case that he will be hearing truly flies in the face of everything that a jurist is supposed to be. And it totally shreds any semblance of respect and dignity that this so-called Justice should have.

There should be some recourse available to the American people to remove this man from the bench. He has absolutely no business being there.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful and committed citizens can change the world."

Check out my blog:

http://truth-for-a-change.blogspot.com/

By MarlipernMarch 27, 2006 - 9:51am

Corporatocracy

This is how these folks govern. We no longer live in a society where the "common good" means a damn thing to those in power. Granted, there are some Dems who still strive for this, but most are just representing their own special interests as well. Don't get me wrong, I vote for the lesser of two evils all the time (usually a Dem), but until we take the money out of governing, not much will change. Why do I feel this way? A little quiz:

If Democrats gain control of the House in 2006, will they push to sign the Kyoto Treaty?

If Democrats gain control of the Senate in 2006, will they impeach Bush?

If either of those things happen, will we (not push for, but...) ACCOMPISH:

Providing universal health care?
Stopping the US Dept of Interior from selling off or leasing our public lands?
Raising fuel economy standards?
Raising the minimum wage? (read Ehrenreich's "Nickel and Dimed")

Some will say these are "socialist" ideas...
maybe so, but if we, as Americans, cannot take care of our own, than what is the purpose of the country that was founded on the ideal of being a self sustaining and fair country?

Write your representatives and tell them how you feel.

By clausen1March 27, 2006 - 11:14am

Clausen--GOOD POST!! --a couple points however..

Clausen--GOOD POST!! --a couple points however..

#1) The HOUSE is the only chamber that can call for IMPEACHMENT. It's the Senate that holds trial and convict their asses!!
( not being pedantic, just preempting a dorked out post from a CON)

#2) On cons distorted understanding of words and "socialism" in particular:

When CONS read the Websters dictionary definition of DEMOCRACY ( supreme power resides with the COMMON PEOPLE)--the cons shriek,"ahhhh, that sounds like socialism"

That's why the CONS must distort & conflate the definition of democracy to mean unregulated Crony-capitalism. They have hoodwinked followers by distorting the "political" system with the "economic" system.

Fact: Democracy is SUPERIOR to capitalism. Not vice versa! or in other words--Capitalism is SUBSERVIENT to Democracy. This is the battle-----definition of GENUINE Democracy!! We the People have SUPREME power to ELECT and VOTE to organize our economic affairs. Usually, a free DEMOCRATIC people will choose REGULATED FREE markets. Not UNREGULATED, Crony-markets. CONS hate that-- that's why they must re-invent language.

"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few. But we can't have both." -- Louis Brandeis, Supreme Court Justice

By AfricaBambaMarch 27, 2006 - 11:57am

U.S. Supreme Court = Kangaroo Court of the Highest Order.

...

By grunchMarch 27, 2006 - 12:04pm

Let’s go to the video

Let’s go to the video tape. click below

http://crooksandliars.com/2006/03/26.html

Our blondes are prettier (and SMARTER) than the CON blondes (Ingraham,Coulter) naa na na na naaaaaaaa naa !!!!

at website scroll down till you get to this:

Lara Logan of CBS News smacked down the "negative Iraq War Coverage" charges

Media was assailed all week by the administration trying to pass the meme that the press is too negative. Instantly, the right wing pundits picked up the theme. Howard Kurtz, who told Wolf Blitzer that the coverage on Iraq is too negative also received an earful from Lara Logan.

By AfricaBambaMarch 27, 2006 - 2:39pm

Another video! Cnn Lou Dobbs & Kevin Phillips

Let’s see the Video tape !!! Unholy alliance between Plutocrats & Preachers

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/21.html#a7601

at website---Scroll down to bottom

Kevin Phillips, the author of the book called, "American Theocracy." was on with Lou Dobbs yesterday to talk about his book and how religious extremism is influencing the White House. His book was the premise for Bush's first question in Cleveland yesterday that he ignored completely.

By AfricaBambaMarch 27, 2006 - 5:15pm

Comments

(6)