From: "Gary Britt" 

There was no such thing as a neocon in the 60's.  John Kerry tried to get
all the same deferments Cheney got.  He just wasn't as competent at getting
deferments as he was at getting purple hearts for fake injuries.

Gary

"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:442b084d{at}w3....
> And many a neocon has the courage to sit at home sending others off to
war.
> When given the opportunity to serve ( ala Cheney ) they then say they had
> better things to do at the time.
>
>
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news:442b042c{at}w3....
> > They had the courage of their stupid and not so well founded ideas.
Many
> > a
> > liberal has the courage to protest OTHER people fighting.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:442afec3{at}w3....
> >> And you don't think it took courage for them to show up in the
audience?
> >> Many times the brave oppose current public sentiment.
> >>
> >>
> >> "Gary Britt" 
wrote in message
> >> news:442afde7{at}w3....
> >> > I'm attacking the group of idiots showing up at the Supreme Court
> > audience
> >> > and some of the statements they have made that show
ignorance of the
> >> > law
> >> > and
> >> > their positions.  Like I said, most of these would be losers who
> > couldn't
> >> > cut it in real life and joined the JAG because it was
the only lawyer
> > job
> >> > they could get and NOT because they shared the same
feelings as the
> > brave
> >> > soldiers who volunteer to actually put themselves in harms way.
> >> >
> >> > Gary
> >> >
> >> > "Rich Gauszka" 
wrote in message
> > news:442aefd4{at}w3....
> >> >> So why are you attacking the military lawyer that
was assigned to
> > defend
> >> >> Hamden?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Gary Britt"
 wrote in message
> >> >> news:442aed50{at}w3....
> >> >> > That they are enemy combatants to be dealt with
by the Military.
> > They
> >> >> > aren't even entitled to a military tribunal,
but for the Supreme
> >> >> > Court's
> >> >> > unconstitutional meddling and ignoring of the
last 150 years of
> >> > precedent.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Gary
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
> >> > news:442ae7fd{at}w3....
> >> >> >> As far as I'm concerned Navy Lt. Cmdr.
Charles Swift is a credit
to
> >> >> >> his
> >> >> >> uniform. What's the policy matter above
Swifts's pay grade? That
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> > people
> >> >> >> held are to all be found guilty so not to
embarrass the Bushies?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Gary Britt"
 wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:442adf0b{at}w3....
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
> >> >> > news:442abb2b{at}w3....
> >> >> >> >> No Gary - Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charles
Swift's a military layer
> > assigned
> >> > to
> >> >> >> > DEFEND
> >> >> >> >> Hamden. What would you have him do
roll over and play dead
like
> >> >> >> >> a
> >> > good
> >> >> >> >> neocon?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0603290179mar29,1,2440889.st
ory?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > A defense of Hamdan doesn't require
questioning the venue for a
> >> > review
> >> >> > nor
> >> >> >> > does it require grandstanding at the
court over policy matters
> > that
> >> > are
> >> >> >> > 100
> >> >> >> > levels above his pay grade.  Nor does
it require bullshit
> > posturing
> >> >> > about
> >> >> >> > applicability of a bill of rights to
prisoners of war and enemy
> >> >> >> > combatants.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Justice Anthony Kennedy, usually a
swing vote on the court,
> > worried
> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> > "if
> >> >> >> >> the president can do this . . . he
can set up commissions in
> > Toledo
> >> > .
> >> >> >> >> .
> >> >> > .
> >> >> >> >> and pick up an alien and not have
any trial at all except
before
> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> special commission
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > And the problem with this would be
what?  If an alien german
> >> > operative
> >> >> >> > were
> >> >> >> > found in Toledo during world war II
would Justice Kennedy find
a
> >> >> >> > problem
> >> >> >> > with incarceration and military
tribunals then?  I don't think
> >> >> >> > so,
> >> > and
> >> >> >> > this
> >> >> >> > is no different.  In my view the
Supreme Court is without
> >> >> >> > constitutional
> >> >> >> > authority to tell the President SQUAT
on his exercise of
> >> >> >> > commander
> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> > chief
> >> >> >> > functions to defend this country at a
time of war.  Let justice
> >> > Kennedy
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > the other liberals on the court show
up at a military base and
> >> >> >> > try
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> > free
> >> >> >> > these enemy combatants and Bush should
follow Lincoln's example
> > and
> >> > put
> >> >> >> > them
> >> >> >> > in a military prison the way Lincoln
put a federal district
judge
> > in
> >> >> >> > prison
> >> >> >> > for trying to interfere where he has
no constitutional
authority.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Gary Britt"
 wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> news:442ab662{at}w3....
> >> >> >> >> > The Bill of Rights IS
IRRELEVANT when it comes to enemy
> >> >> >> >> > combatants
> >> >> >> >> > captured
> >> >> >> >> > on the battlefield.   As
justice Scalia pointed out to some
> >> >> >> >> > pointy
> >> >> >> > headed
> >> >> >> >> > EU
> >> >> >> >> > trash in Switzerland
recently, Germans brought not to a base
> >> > OUTSIDE
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > USA
> >> >> >> >> > but directly to prison camps
INSIDE the USA did NOT have
> >> >> >> >> > rights
> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> > any
> >> >> >> >> > kind
> >> >> >> >> > of trial or hearing in USA
courts.  It would be "crazy" to
> > assert
> >> >> >> >> > otherwise.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > If these few military lawyers
brainwashed by the liberal
> >> > educations
> >> >> >> >> > they
> >> >> >> >> > received (and who likely
became military lawyers because
they
> >> >> > couldn't
> >> >> >> > cut
> >> >> >> >> > it in the real world) don't
like the military acting like
the
> >> >> > military,
> >> >> >> >> > they
> >> >> >> >> > should get the hell out of
the military and go to work for
> > scraps
> >> >> >> >> > for
> >> >> >> > some
> >> >> >> >> > public interest legal group
or the ACLU.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > The Bill of Rights applies to
citizens and in a fairly
limited
> >> >> > context
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> > non-citizens present in the
country.  It does NOT apply and
> >> >> >> >> > has
> >> >> >> >> > NEVER
> >> >> >> >> > applied to prisoners of war
and enemy combatants.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Gary
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> > news:442a8c21$1{at}w3....
> >> >> >> >> >> "If you believe that
these are full and fair trials, you
> > believe
> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> Bill of Rights is
irrelevant," Hamdan's Pentagon-appointed
> >> > defense
> >> >> >> >> > attorney,
> >> >> >> >> >> Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charles
Swift, declared on the front steps
of
> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> marble-columned courthouse.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14208166.htm
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "The commission is
operating in totally uncharted waters;
> >> >> >> >> >> it's
> >> >> >> >> >> charging
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> violation in a stateless,
territorial-less conflict,
> >> >> >> >> >> something
> >> >> >> >> >> which
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> full laws of war have
never applied," replied Katyal, a
> >> > Georgetown
> >> >> >> >> >> University Law Center
professor who was a clerk for Justice
> >> > Stephen
> >> >> >> >> >> Breyer
> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> decade ago.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Uniformed American
military officers were scattered
> >> >> >> >> >> throughout
> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > gallery,
> >> >> >> >> >> among them lawyers from
all four services - Marines, Air
> > Force,
> >> >> >> >> >> Army
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> >> Navy - who in effect
mutinied against their commander in
> >> >> >> >> >> chief
> >> >> >> >> >> by
> >> >> >> >> >> alleging
> >> >> >> >> >> that Bush's commissions
strip foreign captives of
fundamental
> >> >> > rights.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "If you believe that
these are full and fair trials, you
> > believe
> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> Bill of Rights is
irrelevant," Hamdan's Pentagon-appointed
> >> > defense
> >> >> >> >> > attorney,
> >> >> >> >> >> Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charles
Swift, declared on the front steps
of
> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> marble-columned courthouse.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Retired military
officers, civil liberties lawyers, former
> >> >> >> >> >> diplomats
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> >> international law experts
all filed briefs on behalf of the
> >> >> >> >> >> 36-year-old
> >> >> >> >> >> Yemeni with a
fourth-grade education, arguing that the Bush
> >> >> >> >> >> administration
> >> >> >> >> >> went too far by creating
a commission outside an explicit
> >> > framework
> >> >> >> >> >> set
> >> >> >> >> > out
> >> >> >> >> >> by Congress and ignoring
many of the protections of U.S.
> >> >> >> >> >> military
> >> >> >> >> >> justice,
> >> >> >> >> >> which has a provision for
tribunals.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> The justices seemed
especially intrigued with the nature of
> > the
> >> >> > crime
> >> >> >> >> >> alleged, conspiring with
al-Qaida. At least four justices
> > asked
> >> >> >> > questions
> >> >> >> >> >> related to the charge.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Katyal called the
conspiracy charge so broad and unfocused
> > that
> >> > "a
> >> >> >> > little
> >> >> >> >> >> old lady in Switzerland
who donates money to al-Qaida, and
> > that
> >> >> > turns
> >> >> >> > out
> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> be a front for terrorist
acts ... might be swept up within
> > this
> >> >> > broad
> >> >> >> >> >> definition. That's why
international law has so rejected
the
> >> >> >> >> >> concept
> >> >> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> >> >> conspiracy."
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Clement argued that the
court shouldn't even be considering
> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> case
> >> >> >> >> > because
> >> >> >> >> >> Bush had signed a law
Dec. 30 that effectively stripped
> >> > Guantanamo
> >> >> >> >> > captives
> >> >> >> >> >> of pre-commission habeas
corpus challenge.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Some justices focused on
whether Congress intentionally or
> >> >> >> > inadvertently
> >> >> >> >> >> suspended the Writ of
Habeas Corpus for captives in Cuba;
> >> >> >> >> >> Clement
> >> >> >> > argued
> >> >> >> >> >> that Congress' intent was
irrelevant, an argument that
seemed
> > to
> >> >> > find
> >> >> >> >> > favor
> >> >> >> >> >> from Justice Antonin
Scalia, for whom Clement once clerked.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Hamdan claims through his
lawyers that he never joined
> > al-Qaida,
> >> >> >> >> >> wasn't
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> warrior and was merely a
civilian driver who earned $200 a
> > month
> >> >> >> > driving
> >> >> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> >> pickup from bin Laden's
private farm. His lawyer said
Afghan
> >> >> >> >> >> militiamen
> >> >> >> >> >> captured him along the
Afghan border in 2001, after he
> > evacuated
> >> >> >> >> >> his
> >> >> >> >> >> pregnant wife and
2-year-old daughter to Pakistan, and
turned
> >> >> >> >> >> him
> >> >> > over
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> U.S. troops who sent him
to Guantanamo.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Breyer asked what would
stop the president from "picking up
> >> >> >> >> >> an
> >> >> > alien"
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> >> holding the same type of
trial in Toledo, Ohio.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Justice Anthony Kennedy
questioned whether Hamdan wasn't
> >> > "uniquely
> >> >> >> >> >> vulnerable," and
therefore not entitled to certain
> >> > prisoner-of-war
> >> >> >> >> >> considerations under the
Geneva Conventions.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "I don't think he's
protected by the Geneva Conventions,
but
> >> > that's
> >> >> >> >> > largely
> >> >> >> >> >> because he chose not to
comply with the basic laws of war,"
> >> > Clement
> >> >> >> > said.
> >> >> >> >> >> "Nobody has a claim
here that they were part of the
uniformed
> >> >> > al-Qaida
> >> >> >> >> >> division that complied
with all of the laws of war such
that
> >> >> >> >> >> they
> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> >> >> entitled to POW status."
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5