Thursday Open Thread
Breaking from CNN: "U.S. Supreme Court says detainees at Guantanamo Bay have constitutional right to challenge their detention in civilian courts."
AP article : "The vote was 5-4, with the court's liberal justices in the majority... The court said not only that the detainees have rights under the Constitution, but that the system the administration has put in place to classify them as enemy combatants and review those decisions is inadequate." Open thread.
Submitted by Brendan on Thu, 2008-06-12 09:30
Tags:

Comments :
check out what they teach in Muslim school on govt property
in Virginia...
Report: Troubling texts at Va. Islamic school
:
A Saudi madrassa in Virginia that teaches murder. Nice! Multiculturalism at its best.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Lest we forget
The Saudis are our friends.
"(M)ajor polytheism makes blood and wealth permissible," meaning that a Muslim can take with impunity the life and property of someone believed guilty of polytheism."
Wouldn't that just make blood and wealth permissible according to Islam,? Not to mention the Saudi family is rich beyond imagination.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
I wonder if Dems will make one damn bit of difference
when it comes to getting the hell off oil. And if they do and in short order, I will praise them. I can't wait for all those Arab countries getting rich off luck instead of hard work going bankrupt when the world no longer needs their oil.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
*throws a small party* -nt.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Is it a private school?
If it is then they have a right to teach Islamic doctrine, which that is. Now, whether any religious institutions should be allowed to rented out space from government properties is another matter altogether.
It isn't a doctrine I like or respect, but it is consistent of what I've been told is in the Quoran(?).
no one has the right to teach religious doctrine
that includes violence. You mean you missed that part about FBI investigating actual mosques for that precise reason? Sorry but religion does not make you immune on the count of teaching murder.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I'm okay with that criteria
However I can think of maybe one religion in the whole world that'd pass (jainism). All the rest have at least some tenants that involve violence towards others.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
No...don't look in that mirror!
God only knows what that'll start!
it's really not about what is in the "holy books"
but about what is taught in the places of worship. You would be hard pressed to find many churches and synagogues or christian and jewish schools where anything close to jihad and murder is being preached. Mosques and Islamic schools are another story.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
You have to consider the reporting
"At religious schools all across the country children as young as five are taught not only that killing wiccans is permitted but that not killing them is forbidden by Christianity."
That's how a reporter would comment on Exodus 22:18: "Thou shall not suffer a witch to live."
Doesn't matter if the religious schools teach that as literal truth, or mistranslation of the original aramaic, or historical anachronism. It'll get reported that way to sell copy, just like the Islam story above.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
If these fanatics are serious
it is very troubling and threats of violence must be quelled.
As John Kerry suggested these matters are criminal matters and should by dealth with by law enforcement agencies such as the FBI. Similar to the way Christian threats to bomb Planned Parenthood clinics were dealt with.
It is the economy, stupid.
Sure
I just doubt there's any seriousness here. Maybe there is but given the way the article was written and it's brevity this sounds an awful lot like the half dozen "terrorist cells" that have gotten busted in the last six years in the US, everyone of which turned out to be just a few wankers.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
* A social studies text
Sounds almost like the Deutschland circa 1933.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Thank God their Gun Rights
are protected by the NRA advocates for the absolute right to bear arms.
I say extreme zealot fundamentalist dogma that promotes violence in any form is frightening.
To counteract this dogma, there is always Jesus Camp
Noted: the Saudi culture is backwards. The elite Saudi's would send their children abroad for an education, since the Saudi schools were all singularly religiously themed.
It makes Baghdad (pre-US occupation) seem positively progressive, with it's Universities, and secular multi-culturalism.
It is the economy, stupid.
Here's the actual report
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom
I hate that news sources never link to the primary material. Lazy bums.
"You have seen how a man was made a slave; you shall see how a slave was made a man." --Frederick Douglas
the US-Pakistan-Taliban love triangle
So Pakistan and the Taliban come to a truce, for which they have recieved a fair amount of flack from the US, then Tuesday the US blows up 11 Pakistani troops during a "hot pusuit" of Taliban forces from Afghanistan across the border into Pakistan.
Coincidence?
...well, yeah, probably. But spectactularly bad timing, nonetheless.
This is precisely the kind of thing that can be used to whip up popular hatred and paranoia of the US.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Here lies part of the rub, Tialoc;
The fact that the United States government supported the Taliban against the Mukerjeen is one strategy that may or may not have helped lead to the Sept. 11
attacks on New York City's WTC Towers.
Interesting Move
Obama moves DNC operations to Chicago
"As part of the efforts to fully integrate DNC operations with the Obama campaign here in Washington, in Chicago and in the states, political, field and constituency operations are moving to Chicago to work in the Obama headquarters. The goal is to consolidate these efforts into one operation and effectively drive one national strategy."
"The move reflects Obama's desire to maintain an unusually streamlined campaign, as well as his swift and complete takeover of a Democratic Party that isn't always known for its unity."
I have to say, I like Obama's take charge of the change attitude that will hopefully weed out some of crickety, crochety, old time blue dog DLC insiders, that act a lot more like Republicans than Democrats.
It is the economy, stupid.
moving from DC: good.
moving to chicago: bad.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Reporters and religion
Ever read the blog samefacts.com
? Today they have a good article of the above title that discusses a NY Times article written by Michael Luo titled New PAC Seeks to Court Christians for Obama
. It's actually a really good perspective on writers, their limitation of the grasp of religious doctrine and what they say any how. A very short example:
"But the practice of accepting and printing explanations that don't explain anything is especially characteristic of how mainstream reporters cover religion. And that explains why they, and the secular politicians who read their stuff, so consistently get religious questions (and not only Christian religious questions) so totally wrong."
It's a good read.
Today's thought on R vs D for world security ...
From the American Thinker ... via Page Six and the Canadians ... we have:
Clueless.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
McCain: I Can't Stop Outside Groups From Attacking Obama
If McCain can't stand up to the 527s, how is he going to take on Al Qaeda?
in Toronto?
Of course...because the New York Post dedicates an entire paragraph to describing this defeat, we should take them at face value.
They fail to mention why they were doing this in toronto, or who the audience was. For all we know, there were only 14 people in the audience, and three of them were Republican plants intending to produce this exact result. Alternatively, the voting pool could have changed composition between the two polls.
If you're trying to read something into this, it only indicates how desparate you are to be vindicated.
"You have seen how a man was made a slave; you shall see how a slave was made a man." --Frederick Douglas
As you might expect...
...this decisison has lead to a little consternation among certain right wing types. Lots of references to Jackson and Marshall, impeachment of the court, constitutional crises...
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Have you seen what Justice Scalia said afterwards?
"Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, however, is outraged:
"In his dissenting opinion, he devoted an entire section to “a description of the disastrous consequences of what the Court has done today,” a procedure “contrary to my usual practice,” he admitted. Scalia adopted extreme rhetoric about the impacts of the decision, calling it a “self-invited…incursion into military affairs” that would “almost certainly” kill Americans:
– “America is at war with radical Islamists. … Our Armed Forces are now in the field against the enemy, in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
– “The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion plays upon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.”
– “Today the Court warps our Constitution.”
– “The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today.”
None of those reasons have anything to do with Judicial & Constitutional Doctrine which is what I thought Supreme Court Cases actually decided the merrits of a case on. So I would guess from this that Justice Scalia is a ACTIVIST JUDGE who DOESN'T FOLLOW CONSTITUTIONAL PRECEDENT in deciding cases.
I say we impeach him if we could....we can't, we're stuck with him.
Yes,
and I did the same thing I alwasy do when Scalia speaks- I shook my head and muttered "douchebag."
He must thank satan nightly for Thomas' appointment, without which Scalia would easily be the most vacuous member of the court.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
But with Thomas you don't immediatly know that.
Thomas never asks any questions during the hearing of cases. Discussion between the Justices when they are in council is off the record....so who knows what he thinks other than he follows the conservative lead.
There's a reason he doesn't talk
he's spectacularly ill equiped to sit on the bench but he tries not to advertise the fact. Look at the man's underwhelming history. He's notable only for being black and conservative, beyond that he's never really done anything.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Wait...you're forgetting Anita Hill. (n/t)
The argument that some put
The argument that some put forth that Constitutional rights don't extend to detainees in Guantanamo because Guantanamo is not part of the U.S. reminds me of what a buddy of mine said as he (jokingly) sought to rationalize cheating on his wife at some point. His two arguments:
1) That he his wedding was up in New Hampshire, so he was only really married in New Hampshire.
2) That if he used a condom, he would only really be f-cking the condom.
Of course, the desire to act outside the law
And its constraints is really t he point.
They should just come out and say that they really want to torture someone and all the best places keep getting outlawed.
(Kind of like smoking I guess. First they can't torture in restaurants, then in public work areas and now they can't even take it out onto the balcony!)
Your exactly right,
And since the sun will engulf the earth one day, it is impossible for the US to have permanent bases in Iraq.
Point 2 sounds like sound advice.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
happy Loving day
On this date in 1967, the US Supreme Court decided the case of Loving v. Virginia
, striking down Virginia's anti-misegenation statute. Mildred Loving passed away on May 2 of this year, promting a flurry of moving obituaries
. As John Ridley 
noted on NPR's morning edition, Barak Obama was born of a mixed race
marriage in 1961 -- during a time when several states would send cops
to break into the bedrooms of and arrest people like his parents.
In related news, the city of Pittsburgh has approved
a "Mutual Commitment Registry
",
which exists to facilitate the provision of domestic partnership
benefits by institutions in the city. It's a small step, but it's
progress.
"You have seen how a man was made a slave; you shall see how a slave was made a man." --Frederick Douglas
Why is an Absinence Only group getting 2X the money it requested
from the Federal Government?
ABC News runs with Why Did a Lower-Ranked Organization Get Money While Higher-Ranked Groups Were Denied Funding?
They note that the group Best Friends:
"-had not complied with federal regulations that it report how it was spending taxpayer money. When faced with a possible cut-off of their funding, the group did belatedly comply and provided the information.
-And then there was the matter of Best Friends having earlier backed out of a congressionally mandated study on abstinence programs even after it had agreed to participate."
Oh...did I mention that Best freinds had asked for $550K but was awarded $1.1 M? The link notes that:
-Out of 104 grants in their category, Best Friends ranked 53rd.
-In its original category, some fifty organizations were given higher scores than Best Friends by Justice Department reviewers. Forty of them, despite having higher rankings than Best Friends, would receive no money at all from the government.
-The administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), J. Robert Flores pushed the selection and is "best friends" with Best Friends leader.
-Best Friends is run by Elayne Bennett, wife of Bill Bennett, noted conservative voice and gambling addict.
Gee....go figure!
Man...we just don't rate.
Nope, we don't rate at all according to Vanity Fair.
I just saw in the news that
I just saw in the news that Tim Russert died today of a heart attack. Very sad. Only 58 years old. Provided an important public service. A very nice guy as far as I could tell through my TV. And someone I "shared" my Sunday mornings with for many, many years.
Awful most for his family, obviously, but awful for everyone. And a terrible reminder of how fragile life is.
Oh my god.
I've been off the web today. Damn work.
I have to go over to CNN & look.