Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You need to work on your cut and paste skills, along with providing proper citations.
Dropping out of context snippets or those which lack any relevance to the discussion at hand might be sufficient for FAUXNEWS but it doesn't cut it here, for example:
The reference to SOLORIO v. UNITED STATES, 483 U.S. 435 (1987) (please note proper citation)
This decision was overruled, however, in 1987, the Court emphasizing the ‘‘plain language’’ of Art. I, § 8, cl. 14, 35 and not directly addressing any possible limitation stemming from the language of the Fifth Amendment. 36 ‘‘The requirements of the Constitution are not violated
where . . . a court-martial is convened to try a serviceman who was
a member of the armed services at the time of the offense
charged.’’ 37 Even under the service connection rule, it was held
that offenses against the laws of war, whether committed by citizens
or by alien enemy belligerents, could be tried by a military
commission. 38
Is a case regarding the jurisdictional claim between civilian courts and those of the U.S. Military under Congress's plenary power "[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces" -
What this has to do with the rights or lack thereof, of so-called enemy combants has not been expounded upon by you and as a result, I won't attempt to decipher your unexpressed intention.
A closely divided Court has ruled that in time of war
the deportation of an enemy alien may be ordered summarily by
executive action; due process of law does not require the courts to
determine the sufficiency of any hearing which is gratuitously afforded
to the alien. 445
Again, deportation, is not placing a defendants right to life or freedom at jeopardy, and wouldn't apply to the rights entitled through criminal proceeding under the 5th Amendment anyway.
I would go on, but unless someone is paying me, I see no reason to write and extended legal memo where I have to guess at, or reconstruct an argument which requires me to check unsighted or at least improperly cited documentation.
Germany, Japan, and Italy. But I do understand your point since our agitation of the SU and it summarily collapsing was based on that very premise.
In the cases of Germany, Japan or Italy the U.S or its allies didn't select "our guy" to lead the country. I might add that all three were experienced democracies before being taken over by more or less totalitarian regimes.
You need to work on your cut and paste skills, along with providing proper citations.
Dropping out of context snippets or those which lack any relevance to the discussion at hand might be sufficient for FAUXNEWS but it doesn't cut it here, for example:
The reference to SOLORIO v. UNITED STATES, 483 U.S. 435 (1987) (please note proper citation)
This decision was overruled, however, in 1987, the Court emphasizing the ‘‘plain language’’ of Art. I, § 8, cl. 14, 35 and not directly addressing any possible limitation stemming from the language of the Fifth Amendment. 36 ‘‘The requirements of the Constitution are not violated
where . . . a court-martial is convened to try a serviceman who was
a member of the armed services at the time of the offense
charged.’’ 37 Even under the service connection rule, it was held
that offenses against the laws of war, whether committed by citizens
or by alien enemy belligerents, could be tried by a military
commission. 38
Is a case regarding the jurisdictional claim between civilian courts and those of the U.S. Military under Congress's plenary power "[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces" -
What this has to do with the rights or lack thereof, of so-called enemy combants has not been expounded upon by you and as a result, I won't attempt to decipher your unexpressed intention.
A closely divided Court has ruled that in time of war
the deportation of an enemy alien may be ordered summarily by
executive action; due process of law does not require the courts to
determine the sufficiency of any hearing which is gratuitously afforded
to the alien. 445
Again, deportation, is not placing a defendants right to life or freedom at jeopardy, and wouldn't apply to the rights entitled through criminal proceeding under the 5th Amendment anyway.
I would go on, but unless someone is paying me, I see no reason to write and extended legal memo where I have to guess at, or reconstruct an argument which requires me to check unsighted or at least improperly cited documentation.
Wow. All the citations of every one of those decisions by the supreme court were in the link that I provided but let me make sure I provided the link...
Wow. All the citations of every one of those decisions by the supreme court were in the link that I provided but let me make sure I provided the link...
Yup, there it is.
Sorry, but you get a fail if you presented the argument, "here professor, this is the book that supports my argument. My premise and my supporting facts are in there."
Dude,
In order to decipher your first quoted paragraph, I had to save the PDF, to my desktop, do a word search in Acrobat, find the case that it stated was overturned (since it doesn't cite the case itself) and then perform a Lexus search of "O'Callahan overturned 1987" just to find the relevant ruling in Solorio v. U.S. And, after all that, I still have no clue as to what your argument is, since you've never stated what it was to begin with.
Like I said, you want me to do that kind of research, somebody is going to have to pay. Now if you want to write down your argument, and then link to the specific supporting argument, go for it. But I quit doing legal treasure hunts went I last walked out of the Myron Taylor Library 20 plus years ago.
When the AG claims that the terrorists will be tried, but they will continue to stay in custody even if they are acquitted - that's not a mock trial?
The lengths to which the left will contort themselves in their pretzel logic is amazing.
I can't understand how this simple fact can be denied.
They continue to claim that America is a country with laws and we must obey them. Of course they are using them to protect terrorist.
Then they turn around and wont use those same laws to rid America of the scum sucking illegals who are here.
If we are a nation of laws then ALL ILLEGALS must go then right? Afterall we are a nation of laws and being here illegal is breaking the law.
Sanrene, you might as well give up. The left want to protect these terrorist at all cost to us. It is easy to see they will use one law to protect them and use another law to fight against anyone who opposes illegals being here.
The party of hypocrites is sure showing up these days.
Judge tosses out most evidence on Gitmo detainee - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100108/ap_on_go_ot/us_guantanamo_detainee - broken link)
This is the danger of trying enemy combatants that have been captured on the battlefield in our civilian criminal courts. There are not and should not be mirandized on the battlefield.
We can expect more of these kind of rulings with KSM and other high-level detainees - maybe that's what obama has been intending all along.
Maybe this "wake up call" will knock some sense into Holder and Obama.
Or maybe they are all too willing to try the tactics and interrogation techniques.
Another reason not to torture, the prisoner will say anything you want to get it to stop, even confess to things they may not be guilty of. Heck regualr people do it all the time when simply questioned for hours on end by the police. Sorry to disappoint ya but this nation should live by rules otherwise we are no longer a nation where justice means a thing.
Casper
why would anyone want to work for the CIA under Obama after this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene
Judge tosses out most evidence on Gitmo detainee - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100108/ap_on_go_ot/us_guantanamo_detainee - broken link)
This is the danger of trying enemy combatants that have been captured on the battlefield in our civilian criminal courts. There are not and should not be mirandized on the battlefield.
We can expect more of these kind of rulings with KSM and other high-level detainees - maybe that's what obama has been intending all along.
Maybe this "wake up call" will knock some sense into Holder and Obama.
Or maybe they are all too willing to try the tactics and interrogation techniques.
Sorry, but you get a fail if you presented the argument, "here professor, this is the book that supports my argument. My premise and my supporting facts are in there."
Dude,
In order to decipher your first quoted paragraph, I had to save the PDF, to my desktop, do a word search in Acrobat, find the case that it stated was overturned (since it doesn't cite the case itself) and then perform a Lexus search of "O'Callahan overturned 1987" just to find the relevant ruling in Solorio v. U.S. And, after all that, I still have no clue as to what your argument is, since you've never stated what it was to begin with.
Like I said, you want me to do that kind of research, somebody is going to have to pay. Now if you want to write down your argument, and then link to the specific supporting argument, go for it. But I quit doing legal treasure hunts went I last walked out of the Myron Taylor Library 20 plus years ago.
Quote:
In this database, GPOAccess makes available editions and supplements from 1992 forward of Constitution Analysis and Interpretation. The Congressional Research Service in the Library of Congress prepares this service. Publications are released on a need basis, and there is no set amount of time between publications. Until a new edition is published, cumulative supplements are printed as to update information. Each new supplement contains new information in addition to the information contained in the previous supplement. A keyword search can be done in any single publication or any combination of the three options. In addition, files can be downloaded directly from any of the publications through the "download files" link.
Constitution of the United States: About (http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/about.html - broken link)
It's starting to make sense why the people who seem to most stand with the terrorist never seem to have a specific location in their profile description. Coincidence, I think not. And sorry I can't do anything for your ineptitude at using a computer, they make classes for all that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ah a step back into time, not only Repulblcians!
