Thursday, June 29, 2006

Nemo's World: One Small Victory for Justice

___________________________________________

It seems it's finally "payback time" for our legitimate American system of jurisprudence. And oh! how the Supreme Court's imbedded Nazis did scowl : Clarence Thomas virtually "leaping to his feet" -- for the first time in history -- to spew utterly nonsensical, frothing blather; "Fat Tony" Scalia vehemently denouncing his fellow Justices' "audacity" -- for performing their Constitutional duty to interpret the law rather than meekly deferring to the "Leader" under the contrived NeoConNazi notion of "Unilateral Executive" Power (Amerika's own version of the Fuehrer-Prinzip).

Supreme Court Blocks Guantanamo Tribunals
The New York Times

The Supreme Court today delivered a sweeping rebuke to the Bush administration, ruling that it exceeded its authority by creating tribunals for terror suspects that fell short of the legal protections that Congress has traditionally required in military courts.

As a result, the court said in a 5-to-3 ruling, the tribunals violated both American military law and the military's obligations under the Geneva Conventions. ...

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel J. Alito Jr. dissented. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. did not take part in the case, since he had ruled in favor of the government as an appeals court justice last year.

[No big surprises THERE, eh? Except perhaps that Roberts actually *did* recuse himself appropriately, for once.]

Justice Thomas took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench, the first time he has done so in his 15 years on the court. He said that the ruling would "sorely hamper the president's ability to confront and defeat a new and deadly enemy."

Justice Stevens declared flatly that "the military commission at issue lacks the power to proceed because its structure and procedure violate" both the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which governs the American military's legal system, and the Third Geneva Convention. The majority opinion rejected the administration's claims that the tribunals were justified both by President Bush's inherent powers as commander in chief and by the resolution passed by Congress authorizing the use of force after Sept. 11. There is nothing in the resolution's legislative history "even hinting" that such an expansion of the president's powers was considered, he wrote. ...

"Nothing in the record before us demonstrates that it would be impracticable to apply court-martial rules in this case," he wrote. ...

Justice Scalia responded in scathing language to the majority's reasoning on this point. He quoted President Bush's order creating the tribunals, which declared them to be necessary "for the effective conduct of military operations and to prevent terrorist attacks."

"It is not clear where the Court derives the authority - or the audacity - to contradict this determination," Justice Scalia wrote.

[My own guess would be, of course, that the Court derives *its* authority from the Constitution of the United States and established judicial precedents. On the other hand, I SURELY don't know where the *president* supposedly "derives the authority - or the audacity - to" simply make it up as he goes along, effectively appropriating unto himself both the LEGISLATIVE function of the Congress AND the interpretive role of the Judicial Branch. Of course, I'm no distinguished Supreme Court Justice or Constitutional scholar. But then neither, obviously, is ardent dictatorship advocate Antonin "Vaffanculo!" Scalia, for whom whatever Bush says, goes. (I can only wonder whether numerous "Sicilian gestures" may have accompanied that "dissenting opinion".)]

In his dissent, Justice Thomas cited a recent ruling in an environmental case to argue that the majority was being inconsistent in order to denigrate the president's powers.

[Well, it's about time SOMEBODY knocked this Tinhorn Dictator off his exceedingly high horse!! Of course, Thomas's supposed "argument" comes across as an unabashedly biased and irrelevant bit of partisan grandstanding, rather than any "compelling" reasoning based on "points of law".]

"Those Justices who today disregard the commander-in-chief's wartime decisions, only 10 days ago deferred to the judgment of the Corps of Engineers with regard to a matter much more within the competence of lawyers, upholding that agency's wildly implausible conclusion that a storm drain is a tributary of the United States," Justice Thomas wrote. "It goes without saying that there is much more at stake here than storm drains." ...

[HUH??? Either Clarence Thomas has never been a lawyer or he's conspicuously CLUELESS regarding matters of hydrology HE "believes" his legal colleagues are intimately knowledgeable about, according to his ludicrous insinuation that lawyers are eminently qualified to address such *scientific* questions. They are not! By making this preposterously false claim that environmental determinations are "much more within the competence of lawyers" than of *engineers*, he's decidely blowing copious quantities of smoke out an unmentionable body cavity. Small wonder he so rarely speaks out -- 'Better to remain silent and conceal your ignorance than open your mouth and manifest it for all to see.']
__________

Yes, the Fascist faction of the SCOTUS has definitely suffered a humiliating defeat this round. But the "Totalitarian Task Force" has clearly been emboldened by its newfound prominence under the Bush Reich. They're "hopping mad" -- literally. And they'll be back.

But for now, let's just GLOAT over this one small victory for justice and the ridiculous shenanigans of that frustrated judicial cabal. It's so seldom we get such a delightful opportunity! :-)

~ Nemo

12 Comments:

Blogger Robert said...

Amen

Fri Jun 30, 12:40:00 AM  
Anonymous Barnita said...

OT but very frying - today's morning news had this story.

A group of American soldiers in an insurgent-riddled town allegedly noticed a young Iraqi woman when on patrol and later returned to rape her, according to U.S. officials Friday. In an apparent cover-up attempt, she and three members of her family then were killed and her body was set on fire.

No words.

Fri Jun 30, 11:25:00 PM  
Blogger Again said...

Nemo's world:
On the other hand, I SURELY don't know where the *president* supposedly "derives the authority - or the audacity -

may i cite mannning (he salutes me by trying to convert me to the right thinking - he really seems to agree with my dictatorship-post. NOT.)?

Congress has for many years tried to ursurp the powers of the Presidency, and to drown the Administration in details of their ideas without providing the necessary means to accomplish their bills-especially the funds to expand the government to meet their laws.
A law without the means to execute it is a dead law, and it is correct to say so up front, which is what Bush has done in many cases.
Even when he agrees with the law, he cannot in all honesty avoid spelling out why he cannot enforce it. The failure lies with Congress, in many cases. You should read his signing statements


so you see, Nemo - you simply don't understand it or maybe you "did not read [it] carefully enough"

(btw: i guess, you would like my reply ;-) )

Sat Jul 01, 02:39:00 AM  
Blogger Again said...

Barnita
A group of American soldiers in an insurgent-riddled town allegedly noticed a young Iraqi woman when on patrol and later returned to rape her, according to U.S. officials Friday. In an apparent cover-up attempt, she and three members of her family then were killed and her body was set on fire.

may i cite you?

I hate this world. I hate everything. I don't want to live in a world like this. There seems no way it can improve. I think I'll go sit in my corner and start laying out the rules for a suicide cult.

sometimes i think, that only Mother Nature can stop this cancer-species...

and then i think, how sad it is! How really hopeful and wise and caring this humankind had started, how the first steps in civilization were based on reason (thanks, nemo for the hint - at first i took the word "ratio" again ;-) ), how the humans 40,000 years ago started to invent scripting and structured measurements, how they inventend division of labor, industrial production 20,000 years ago - and how the first (artistically decorated) weapons looked like: decorated with horses. Why? Because the hunters had to kill the animals but wanted to show their respect by the symbol of the soul, the horse. You can see it in history - as long as the double-ax is shown you know that weapons are made for hunting and self-defense only...

then the original sin poisoned humankind - making her regress to apish behavior - you can see it in history, it was the time, when cities started to need walls to protect themselves (not that long: even America knew this state of development: Caral in Peru, 4,600 years ago, but the regress already had started: the poor already existed to feed the elite)

what a sad plot for our species

Sat Jul 01, 02:57:00 AM  
Blogger Robert said...

Bill "The feline scourge" Frist has already indicated that all this was just an academic exercise because the House and the Senate would work with the president to make sure that these allged bad guys never see a public trial.

Sadly enough, I didn't even get my hopes up.....

Sat Jul 01, 02:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Nemo said...

Again: Ah, it's obvious that Monsieur Mannnure retains his access to the finest, "top shelf" brands of "Kool-aid". Reality and introspection NEVER seem to intrude on that critter's "thinking"! Species Homo credulus?? ;-)

Sun Jul 02, 01:10:00 AM  
Anonymous Nemo said...

Robert: Look at the "bright side"! How often do you get to hear about Clarence Thomas making a COMPLETE ass of himself publicly? (Savor it for that alone, my friend.) But it *is* a genuine victory, however small. Bush *must* now get full Congressional approval in order to deviate from established law in this case. He actually has to "humble himself" and go before Congress, for once -- like a REAL president -- rather than just make it all up as he goes along. ==== Fascism encroaches by small steps. And barring a dramatic upheaval -- which, as you know, I'm certainly "game" for -- it may also have to recede by small steps, until it is finally "held at bay" in this country. Barring an outright revolution, I see few other viable alternatives.

Sun Jul 02, 01:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Nemo said...

Further analysis on the Supreme Court's ruling and the future prospects of the Court *and* the country as a whole: The '06 Stakes Just Got Raised, by Robert Parry [Consortium News] ==== The narrow margin of the U.S. Supreme Court's rebuke to George W. Bush on military tribunals highlights the stakes on the table for the November 2006 congressional elections - nothing short of the survival of a meaningful constitutional system in the United States. ...

Sun Jul 02, 03:34:00 AM  
Anonymous Nemo said...

Barnita: Nice to see how the US is maintaining its "moral high ground" through all this mayhem, eh? :-( The events you referred to above have *further* degenerated since the initial reports, a development I wouldn't have even considered *possible*: GIs May Have Planned Iraq Rape, Slayings ==== Investigators believe American soldiers spent nearly a week plotting an attack in which they raped an Iraqi woman, then killed her and her family in an insurgent-ridden area south of Baghdad, a US military official said Saturday. ==== The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, said the attack appeared "totally premeditated" and that the soldiers apparently "studied" the family for about a week before carrying out the attack. ==== According to the official, the Sunni Arab family had just moved into a new home in the religiously mixed area about 20 miles south of Baghdad. The Americans entered the home, separated three family members from the woman, then raped her and set fire to her body, the official said. The three others were also slain. A senior Army official who also requested anonymity because the investigation is ongoing said one of the victims was a child. ...

Sun Jul 02, 11:57:00 PM  
Blogger Again said...

nemo:
According to the official, the Sunni Arab family had just moved into a new home in the religiously mixed area about 20 miles south of Baghdad. The Americans entered the home, separated three family members from the woman, then raped her and set fire to her body, the official said.

NO!

that truly sounds like the Serbians, "professionally raping" to "end the insurgence"...

set fire to her body? Isn't it enough for a woman to be raped by a soulless gang of rowdies? Nemo, you must feel, like i feel when i read or see something about how the (previous) "Herrenrasse" behaved...

Mon Jul 03, 05:49:00 AM  
Anonymous Nemo said...

'Nemo, you must feel, like i feel when i read or see something about how the (previous) "Herrenrasse" behaved'... ==== Again: Yep! Absolutely. 8-(

Tue Jul 04, 01:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I really enjoyed looking at your site, I found it very helpful indeed, keep up the good work.
»

Thu Aug 17, 04:38:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home