You're really unhesitant at getting out in front on cheering the release of a man who has admitted to being a member of Al Qaeda trained to murder your countrymen.
I really do hope you don't soon have reason to be embarassed about this post.
Posted by
Potential Victim # 232,012,945 |
Link to this comment |
03- 2-05 9:10 AM
4
Potential Vic, you probably understand, but don't feel like admitting, that Padilla's potential release isn't what I'm cheering. The authorities knew about Padilla, so they could have tracked him, either to build a case against him, or to find other people in his network. Then they could have charged him and allowed him access to counsel. None of that would have endangered anyone (arguably, it would have made us safer to find his associates) and it wouldn't have made a mockery of the Constitution. That last bit--the fact that there are Republican judges who care about the Constitution--is what I'm cheering.
PV, the Constitution guarantees certain rights to American citizens, especially those accused of a crime. I'm not a big fan of slippery slope arguments, but if ever a case where said argument was more apt, I'm at a loss to identify it. The government is not allowed to lock people up without bringing specific charges and holding a trial.
<sarcasm>If you don't like it, why don't you move to RussiaChina Iraq.<sarcasm>
Not all good news coming out on civil liberties. From Talk Left (via Drum):
"Homeland Security is requiring immigrants in 8 cities who are in the process of applying for residency to wear electronic monitoring ankle bracelets 24/7.
These people have never been accused of a crime. There are 1,700 of them to date."
Unf served me. I just saw on CT - where apparently Unf has time to comment - that this policy relates to people in technical violation of the immigration laws. I didn't click through, but from his description, it sounds like an administrative policy along the lines of racial segregation of prisoners. I.e., I'm OK with it if it makes it easier for those being imposed upon.
Half our country is still OK with this, though. It's nice, but let's see if it lasts.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 03- 1-05 9:28 AM
ACTIVIST JUDGES!!
Posted by Walter Sobchak | Link to this comment | 03- 1-05 11:44 AM
Hmmmm.
You're really unhesitant at getting out in front on cheering the release of a man who has admitted to being a member of Al Qaeda trained to murder your countrymen.
I really do hope you don't soon have reason to be embarassed about this post.
Posted by Potential Victim # 232,012,945 | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 9:10 AM
Potential Vic, you probably understand, but don't feel like admitting, that Padilla's potential release isn't what I'm cheering. The authorities knew about Padilla, so they could have tracked him, either to build a case against him, or to find other people in his network. Then they could have charged him and allowed him access to counsel. None of that would have endangered anyone (arguably, it would have made us safer to find his associates) and it wouldn't have made a mockery of the Constitution. That last bit--the fact that there are Republican judges who care about the Constitution--is what I'm cheering.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 9:16 AM
PV, the Constitution guarantees certain rights to American citizens, especially those accused of a crime. I'm not a big fan of slippery slope arguments, but if ever a case where said argument was more apt, I'm at a loss to identify it. The government is not allowed to lock people up without bringing specific charges and holding a trial.
<sarcasm>If you don't like it, why don't you move to
RussiaChinaIraq.<sarcasm>Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 9:32 AM
Jeebus.
"...if ever a case existed where..."
And, uh, </sarcasm>. Just so any subsequent non-sarcastic comments don't get falsely inflected.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 9:35 AM
Not all good news coming out on civil liberties. From Talk Left (via Drum):
"Homeland Security is requiring immigrants in 8 cities who are in the process of applying for residency to wear electronic monitoring ankle bracelets 24/7.
These people have never been accused of a crime. There are 1,700 of them to date."
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 11:53 AM
Jesus. I sure as hell wouldn't emigrate here now (though most other desirable countries are also becoming less hospitable).
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 11:55 AM
Unf served me. I just saw on CT - where apparently Unf has time to comment - that this policy relates to people in technical violation of the immigration laws. I didn't click through, but from his description, it sounds like an administrative policy along the lines of racial segregation of prisoners. I.e., I'm OK with it if it makes it easier for those being imposed upon.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 12:13 PM
Brian Weatherson raises cause for concern later in those comments. Some other guy named Matt adds his informed perspective to my uninformed one.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 12:42 PM
Unf, everywhere but at Unfogged.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 03- 2-05 1:54 PM