1 posted on
06/29/2004 11:57:28 AM PDT by
Dog Gone
To: Dog Gone
Well, essentially the Supreme Court permitted or actually encouraged this, so I fail to see how anybody could complain. (Although I expect the whining to begin any minute now.)
2 posted on
06/29/2004 12:06:50 PM PDT by
livius
To: Dog Gone
Bump.
Too bad Court TV can't carry these cases. Or can they?
3 posted on
06/29/2004 12:07:57 PM PDT by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi Mac ... Godspeed x40 ... Support Our Troops!!! ......Become a FR Monthly Donor ...)
To: Dog Gone
the last statement in the article, about yesterday's SCOTUS ruling making no difference - is just pie in the sky. there are 600 habeas cases coming like a locomotive to federal court.
9 posted on
06/29/2004 12:34:09 PM PDT by
oceanview
To: Dog Gone
OK. I'm confused. The article says the detainees have access to "civil courts" per the Supremes. I'm all for military tribunals and thought they should have been convened ages ago (though perhaps we weren't finished squeezing these guys)
I can't see were a military tribunal is a civil court, sooooo is the article wrong or is the Pentagon defying the Sups? (Not likely.)
13 posted on
06/29/2004 1:54:04 PM PDT by
GVnana
To: Dog Gone
It's about damn time... almost three years after 9/11, it's time to start executing these thugs.
16 posted on
06/29/2004 2:45:59 PM PDT by
Lunatic Fringe
(John F-ing Kerry??? NO... F-ING... WAY!!!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson