1 posted on
06/30/2006 10:26:25 AM PDT by
radar101
To: 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 3pools; 3rdcanyon; 4Freedom; 4ourprogeny; 7.62 x 51mm; ..
To: Congressman Billybob
In yesterday's Hamdan ruling, the court said the U.S. must abide by the strictest interpretations of the Geneva Accord, which is not kept by most other countries and is largely null and void. Yet, in these cases, the Court ruled otherwise--that an international treaty, the Vienna Convention, was not binding. Ping to your attention.
3 posted on
06/30/2006 10:55:06 AM PDT by
dirtboy
(When Bush is on the same side as Ted the Swimmer on an issue, you know he's up to no good...)
To: radar101
Very interesting. Although, I'm sure the ACLU are busy filing more paperwork.
4 posted on
06/30/2006 11:32:33 AM PDT by
mtbopfuyn
(I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
To: radar101
It's a bit murky, but since the Kennedy concurrence (joined in by three liberals) refused to base the decision on the Geneva Convention, it appears only Stevens agreed with that part of the opinion.
To: radar101
In yesterday's Hamdan ruling, the court said the U.S. must abide by the strictest interpretations of the Geneva AccordHamdan was political on its very face. There is no basis in fact or law that the Geneva Convention applies to Gitmo "detainees", just that the Supremes say so.
All hail, mighty Supremes!
Doesn't it make you want to blow chunks?
6 posted on
06/30/2006 3:11:52 PM PDT by
WarEagle
(Karl Rove did it....)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson