Huh... Didn't See This Comin'

Apparently, the Geneva Conventions aren't quite so quaint after all.

In the wake of the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld decision, it appears that the Department of Defense has now circulated a memo to all the players that the detainees we have at GTMO and other places are in fact human beings with all rights and priveleges thereunto pertaining, regardless of the condition in which we found them. From the Washington Post:

The Bush administration, in an apparent policy reversal sparked by a recent Supreme Court ruling, said today it will extend the guarantees of humane treatment specified by the Geneva Conventions to detainees in the war-on-terror.

In a memo released by the Pentagon this morning, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, citing the Supreme Court's decision, ordered all Pentagon personnel to "adhere to these standards" and to "promptly review" all policies and practices "to ensure that they comply with the standards" of the Geneva Convention's Common Article 3.

So while that might appear to the be the ball game, off course, things are still a little more complicated than that.

None of this has stopped Sparky Gonzalez and the untouchables from asking Federal Magistrates to ignore the Supreme Court and prevent anyone in GTMO from accessing the legal system anyway.

The idea the that Justice is floating is that Hamdan did not create a new challenge to enemy combatant status in the courts, but rather would dump all this on the D.C. District Court of Appeals as enshrined in the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005. Short version: "Sand monkeys still don't get no stinkin' Geneva rights as far as we're concerned."

Now granted this is all before the new Pentagon memo. So we will see how the other executive level departments react.

mojo sends

Try Not To Think About It

If you do have to think about it, try not to obsess over it much.

Arthur Silber Is A Paragon Of Shrillness

He seems quite miffed, don't you think?

Hey, You Kids! Get Off My Lawn!

Ganked from the excellent Cursor.Org:

• Yet more excellent political counsel for Democrats, whose party is currently controlled by an elite cadre who have lost their ability to use hard-headed common sense to separate fact from fiction. The sooner that party begins sharing its leadership positions with the younger generation of activists who came of age well after the end of the Vietnam War, the better off everyone will be. The "boomer" generation of Democrats have got to go, and it would be nice if they would go quietly... for once in their miserable lives.


• The Shrill One, Paul Krugman's column today, The Treason Card (shamelessly and righteously pirated here) provides a polite reminder that "the Bush administration and the movement it leads have been engaged in an authoritarian project, an effort to remove all the checks and balances that have heretofore constrained the executive branch."


• Lindsay Beyerstein keeps the torch lit for Wiccan veterans of American foreign wars. You know, of course, what this means is that the Veteran's Administration is pissing on the Christian cross in this affair, by turning the symbol of one of the world's great religions into just another secular badge of fraternal association. After all, we're certain the VA isn't motivated by religious bigotry or anything like that. It's purely an aesthetic choice. They just think pentagrams clash with the rest of the artwork.


• Keeping an eye on Karl Rove over the holiday (because, she says, "somebody has to") Molly Ivins predicts a wave of attacks on immigration in the upcoming mid-term election campaigns for Congress.


• Does anything about this ring any bells for you?

OWW!!! MY EYE!!!!!

I don't know what has come over these people, but it had better stop soon, before the entire Internet degenerates into endless, grinding, trench warfare.

Here at The MojoWire, we prefer to remain neutral in conflicts like this. Nevertheless, all parties should think twice before attacking us. We have weapons in deep storage more terrifying than anything the world has ever known. Yes, Bill Shatner singing Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds is truly horrifying. Yes, the Star Wars Christmas Special is devastating in its effects— leaving the buildings still standing while corpses litter the streets. Yes, the full five-minute rendition of Let The Eagle Soar is an Apocalypse In A Can.

Do not threaten us or we will be forced to retaliate with The UFO Conspiracy file!

If the mere mention of its name does not sap your very will to live, then consider yourself lucky and pray to whatever deities you find comforting in these dark days that we never feel sufficiently threatened by escalating hostilities in neighboring Left Blogovia that we break the U.N. Security Council seals on the Level-4 containment facility where we keep the fissile material.

VERBOTEN!... that means you, hippy!

In the never ending search to bring the sharpest legal minds in the country to focus on how to best dismantle our Republic, the Pentagon has broken off a million bucks for some hacks on Planet Texas to generate a model statute that would help role back "right to know" public information laws. [c.f. USA Today, July 6, 2006]

Here you go, enjoy:

Jeffrey Addicott, a professor at the law school, said he will use that research to produce a national “model statute” that state legislatures and Congress could adopt to ensure that potentially dangerous information “stays out of the hands of the bad guys.”

“There's the public's right to know, but how much?” said Addicott, a former legal adviser in the Army's Special Forces.

“There's a strong feeling that the law needs to balance that with the need to protect the well-being of the nation. … There's too much stuff that's easy to get that shouldn't be,” he said.

I particularly like that this guy was "legal advisor" to the Special Warfare Command. Just think of the shit that guy had to deny...

Had enough?

mojo sends

I can't begin to tell you how happy...

... this makes me.

Really. I can't.

The report quotes Scott Barfield, a Defense Department investigator, saying, "Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces, and commanders don't remove them from the military even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members."

Mr. Barfield said Army recruiters struggled last year to meet goals. "They don't want to make a big deal again about neo-Nazis in the military," he said, "because then parents who are already worried about their kids signing up and dying in Iraq are going to be even more reluctant about their kids enlisting if they feel they'll be exposed to gangs and white supremacists."

This is just the most outstanding thing I have heard in a long time. And I have absolutely no doubt that it's not only true, but that at some senior level, it's actually policy.

Do I have to support these troops, too?

U.S. Military Interfering With Objectivity Of Embedded Reporters

You knew this was happening, right?

FP: How often do you travel outside of the Green Zone?

RN: The restrictions on [journalists’] movements are very severe. It is extremely dangerous to move around anywhere in Iraq, but we do. We all have Iraqi staff who get around, and we go on trips arranged by the U.S. State Department as frequently as we can.

But the military has started censoring many [embedded reporting] arrangements. Before a journalist is allowed to go on an embed now, [the military] check[s] the work you have done previously. They want to know your slant on a story—they use the word slant—what you intend to write, and what you have written from embed trips before. If they don’t like what you have done before, they refuse to take you. There are cases where individual reporters have been blacklisted because the military wasn’t happy with the work they had done on embed. But we get out among the Iraqi public a whole lot more than almost any American official, certainly more than military officials do.

They use the word "slant" now. And, like General Dreedle and Colonel Cathcart from Catch-22, it doesn't matter whether you are doing your job and reporting the facts accurately and precisely— the military brass want you to like them, and if you don't like them, then they'll find somebody to take your place who does like them.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the military shouldn't be able to choose who to let into their operational security perimeter. I'm just saying that you're an idiot if you think any report originated by a "journalist" embedded with the U.S. military is any more independent and credible than a press release from CENTCOM or some geeky lieutenant in a PIO billet.

If you're an embed, then you are simply not credible anymore. If you're an embed, then your job is to produce messages that the military doesn't want to be caught making in an official capacity itself, which means they are necessarily suspect as a result. If you're an embed, then you are lower than the snakes who print celebrity porn gossip in supermarket tabloids. At least, they have honest jobs.

Update: And, oh yeah— I shouldn't have to say it, but this means you, too, Matt Taibbi.

Your Seat May Be Used As A Flotation Device

Via Dave Johnson at Seeing The Forest...

When scrubs attack!

The Boston Globe published a column today resurrecting the scrum between Kos and The New Republic. This quote jumped out at me:

``This fight is saying `Welcome to the big leagues,' " said Richard Bradley , the former editor of George Magazine and a blogger himself. ``If you want us to take you seriously, we're going to ask you the same questions that we ask anyone else who aspires to be a power-player in Democratic politics."

Umm...it most certainly is not saying welcome to the Big Leagues. This was a welcome to the spectacle of watching someone being slapped by a girl scout for not liking her cookies. Pathetic and funny is a far more apt description. Big League play would be closer to the treatment the New York Times is getting from the Administration and it's worthless lying sychophants accusing it of being in league with terrorists for doing it's job. When the editor is threatened with the gas chamber on television, when reporters and their kids are threatened with having their addresses published so they can be targeted by violent a-holes, that is the big leagues. A bunch of magazine writers at an elitist political mag with limited circulation getting their noses out of joint because bloggers are calling them the Joe Liberman weekly is simply lame. It crosses over to pathetic when they have to gin up a fake email from an "anonymous" source is smear their target, and won't declare that source when the email is proven fake. What happened to you people?

Look, the GOP and their Thug propopagana machine have declared war on a free press. Why any column space is wasted whining about Kos or any other blog is incomprehensible. Look TNR, the White House HATES you and everything you stand for. They have nothing but contempt for a free press that reports the truth. They only like outlets that do what they are told. This is not even controversial. It's not like they hide it from plain view. If you value your profession, you might want to start defending it and not allow the right wing hate machine to get over on you. If it's not too late, which I am not convinced of.

No One Left To Speak Up For You

What if the problem is that no one will speak up for you at all, in the beginning, before "they" have come for anyone on their list of internal enemies? (To my Jewish friends: let's stand together against craphounds like these, shall we? We don't have to see eye to eye about God to recognize these pinheads as a problem for all of us.)

I want my edupolicy debate!

The Miami Herald has an article today highlighting an interesting struggle going on within Education policy between the Federal Government and the States regarding testing standards .

A little background here; NCLB requires that the states test all their students annually to determine their proficiency in math and english and report that back to the Federal Government and to the public. Those test results are then used to calculate the all important Adequate Yearly progress (henceforth AYP). Schools that consistently fail to meet AYP are supposed to eventually receive some kind of sanction. Those sanctions can be pretty drastic, up to and including getting rid of the school in favor of charter or private options.

One of the more credible complaints about NCLB is directed towards the state tests. The states have significant autonomy in determining what constitutes proficient. It varies from state to state. What has become apparent is some states are, predictably, setting absurdly low standards for what constitutes proficient. We know the states are gaming the system because the Federal Government administers it's own tests to students every two years called the National Assessment of Education Progress.(NAEP). To be precise, I am referring to the Main NAEP, not the long term trend. In many states, the number of students that test proficient was significantly lower on the NAEP than on their states tests. In some cases, 40+ percentage points different.

The Department of Education is addressing this issue by evaluating each states testing standards. Those states that are not compliant will be subject to sanctions. Amusingly, one of the those sanctions on the states is a particularly deft act of bureaucratic jujitsu. If the states testing system is determined to be substandard, the Federal Governments Title I administrative money will bypass the state education department and go directly to the districts. As you can guess, control of those funds affords the State DOE's substantial power. Bypassing them is a fairly effective bitchslap.

To be fair, the NAEP itself is not above reproach according to many critics, who question it's accuracy. I do not have the expertise and background to make a evaluation of the testing methodologies. That is an arcane policy argument going in edu policy circles. I have no doubt though that some states are gaming the system, it's alot easier than trying to fix schools, particularly in states where the schools are underfunded and increasing taxes is tantamount to declaring yourself an acolyte of Satan. It's possible, as Florida is arguing, that the discrepancies are ones of methodology, not rigor, and their proficiency scores are valid measures of progress. Personally, I doubt that is the case. The discrepancies are too wide in most cases to be attributable to different methodologies. The more likely conclusion is that the states don't want to be held publicly accountable for low scores, it makes the policy makers and the politicians look bad. (Both parties are culpable here.)

I realize this sounds like the sort of eye glazing policy wonkery, complete with sorcerous arguments about testing methodology, that liberals are infamous for. But dammit, these arguments really matter. And simply running around trying to sprinkle the magic fairy dust of Milton Friedman around with vouchers is not cutting it, Red State. I think vouchers in some form should be on the table as a possible policy alternative, but most of the voucher plans I've seen are scams meant to defund the public system so that little Dick and Jane RedState can go to Jesusfreakery high on the public dime and learn about the flat earth and the angelic precivilization that left the dinosaurs bones to trick us into going to hell. The key in voucher schemes is how they try to exempt them from testing requirements, something they did in the Milwaukee voucher program. (I highly recommend this series on the voucher program in Milwaukee done by the local fishwrap. It's comprehensive and fair and a good primer on the issues, pro and con)

My point is, it's impossible to sort out issues like vouchers until you come to terms with basic issues of assessment. What is a good school system, and how do we know it's good? We certainly don't need worthless screeds like the one David Brooks popped off a few weeks ago about how boys are being oppressed by being forced to read girlie books.

In Florida, the political stakes are high, since Jeb is a possible candidate for President and having 500 schools sanctioned for sucking and supporting a rating system that is possibly invalid doesn't help him. Junior will never allow DOE to do this to Jeb or to Florida. The DOE will find a way to cut Florida slack. They will avoid the real question, are the schools in question any good, and are the NCLB requirements the way to go? That's a good question I wish we talked about more in mainstream political discussion, and less about TranAnnie and her plagerizing hatred for Liberal Democracy.

Kenneth Lay, 1942-2006

So Enron's mastermind has died

Wonder how soon he will be directing a multi-billion dollar off-shore hedge fund from beyond the grave?

mojo sends

Happy July 4th Mr. Jefferson

In honor of the signing of the Declaration, here is one of my favorite Thomas Jefferson stories:

When Jefferson became President in 1801, he pardoned all those convicted under the Alien and Sedition Act. When Federalist papers made him the subject of fierce attacks, he took no legal action. A visiting Prussian minister found a copy of one such newspaper in a room outside Jefferson's office and was astonished that Jefferson had not suppressed it. "Put that paper in your pocket, Baron," Jefferson told him, "and should you ever hear the reality of our liberty, our freedom of the press questioned, show them this paper and tell them where you found it."

The Road to Iran..

Sy Hersh in the New Yorker has a new article on the ramp up to military action in Iran. The depth of this Administrations stupidity on this issue defies understanding. Here are a few quotes that jumped out at me:

In contrast, some conservatives are arguing that America’s position in Iraq would improve if Iran chose to retaliate there, according to a government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon’s civilian leaders, because Iranian interference would divide the Shiites into pro- and anti-Iranian camps, and unify the Kurds and the Sunnis. The Iran hawks in the White House and the State Department, including Elliott Abrams and Michael Doran, both of whom are National Security Council advisers on the Middle East, also have an answer for those who believe that the bombing of Iran would put American soldiers in Iraq at risk, the consultant said. He described the counterargument this way: “Yes, there will be Americans under attack, but they are under attack now.”

Dumbassery? you're soaking in it. Are they kidding? Gee, what would happen if Iran sent hundreds if not thousands of Revolutionary guardsmen into Iraq to create havoc? Err...more dead American troops and Iraqi civilians. And what about the already miserable Iraqi civilians already caught in the crossfire between American troops, insurgents, militias and criminal gangs in Iraq. Screw them, right Elliot? They can wash the horror down with a tall frosty glass of freedom. As long you people get in the history books, right?

It gets worse:

In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran’s uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. The huge complex includes large underground facilities built into seventy-five-foot-deep holes in the ground and designed to hold as many as fifty thousand centrifuges. “Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning,” the former senior intelligence official told me. “And Pace stood up to them. Then the world came back: ‘O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.’ ” At the time, a number of retired officers, including two Army major generals who served in Iraq, Paul Eaton and Charles Swannack, Jr., had begun speaking out against the Administration’s handling of the Iraq war. This period is known to many in the Pentagon as “the April Revolution.”

“An event like this doesn’t get papered over very quickly,” the former official added. “The bad feelings over the nuclear option are still felt. The civilian hierarchy feels extraordinarily betrayed by the brass, and the brass feel they were tricked into it”—the nuclear planning—“by being asked to provide all options in the planning papers.”

We pointed out this scheme to use nukes in Iran on the radio show. These people are bats**t crazy. There is just no other way to describe this. And I wonder how long General Pace had to hold his breath before the White House and the SecDef relented on this issue? The cruel humor of this story is that besides Hersh and the liberal blogs, no one seemed remotely concerned that the whackjobs in the White House wanted to drop a nuke on Iran, based almost soley on their suspicians and their own personal judgement on what is militarily feasible. Aren't these the same jokers who screwed up in Iraq? I didn't dream that right? Hellooo? Beltway media..? Are you out there? The President wants to nuke somebody? Oh, and by the way he hates you and everything you purportedly stand for. Just sayin...

We have said this on the radio show and here ad nauseum. This White House desperately wants to take on Iran. All of this supposed diplomatic manuevering is to exhaust diplomatic options without actually trying to resolve the problem. It's just a fig leaf to cover their real intentions to go after Iran. It doesn't take a whole lot of insight to come to this conclusion. Their failure is Iraq has not made them question their views on any issue. It's been completely rationalized to blame everyone else and to justify doing the same thing on a larger scale.

Hersh noted something very important in this article that is not being talked about near enough:

Qatar is a leading exporter of gas and currently operates several major offshore oil platforms, all of which would be extremely vulnerable. (Nasser bin Hamad M. al-Khalifa, Qatar’s ambassador to Washington, denied that any threats were issued during the Emir’s meetings in Tehran. He told me that it was “a very nice visit.”)

A retired American diplomat, who has experience in the Gulf, confirmed that the Qatari government is “very scared of what America will do” in Iran, and “scared to death” about what Iran would do in response. Iran’s message to the oil-producing Gulf states, the retired diplomat said, has been that it will respond, and “you are on the wrong side of history.”

They are right to be scared to death. Now just imagine the effect of an enormmous shock to the oil and gas markets on our precarious financial situation in this country. Not just the economic effect, but the social chaos and the opportunity it will offer to the eliminationists and the Dominionists.

Sleep well!

The Archie Award for 2006...

I would like to take this opportunity to present the 2006 Archibald Cox Award for Self-Destructive Over Achievement in Government Service to U.S. Navy Lt. Commander Charles Swift whose zealous defense of, and pursuit of due process for, accused terrorist and GTMO detainee Salim Ahmed Hamdan, for the past couple of years and his recent ass-whoopin' of Maximum Leader's lawyers in front of the Supremes last week in a stunning victory for of the U.S. Constitution will likely cost him his Naval Career.

According to reporting done by Raw Story and others, Swift has already been passed up by a promotion review board once in the past two years, for no apparent reason, and has received indications that his upcoming board will also bypass him for full Commander again.

This overt disregard for a brilliant military and legal career comes despite continually being recognized as one of the 50 most influential lawyers in America, and the public accolades of his commanding officer, Marine Corps Col. Dwight Sullivan who says:

"He's doing a fantastic job."... Sullivan spoke of the crucial importance of the case decided Thursday by the Supreme Court. "It's a fundamental constitutional question about the powers of the president," Sullivan said. Asked about Swift's aggressive legal challenge of the commander in chief, Sullivan saluted Swift's "moral courage."

"He has been absolutely fearless is pursuing his client's interests. And also he has exhibited an extraordinary level of legal skill. His legal strategy has been brilliant.

"We all take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and he has certainly done that, literally."

Well, thank God that dangerous kook won't be contaminating the ideology pool in the halls of government anymore. Because the last thing any of need is more smart lawyers in government service taking their oath to protect the Constitution seriously and doing it with talent, brains, guts and compassion...

Yeah, fortunately we will be quit of that guy, soon... At least I can take some comfort in the fact that at least he will now get into the private sector, rake phat stacks of mad bank, and will no longer be constrained by the politics of being a military lawyer. Or as Shaft says: "Tell me, now that I'm not a cop anymore, do you think this makes less dangerous... or more..."

We would like to congratulate the runners up, Department of Justice Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who in spite of a high profile investigation, indictment of Scooter Libby and nut-busting dealing with Karlos the Jackal has still not managed to get himself fired yet... Also, mad props to Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who in spite of indicting Tom Delay and thereby ending one of the most brutal and effective leadership and money laundering regimes in the House of Representatives, still has not faced a significant threat to his career...

Keep at it guys, and you too can jon the Cox alumni...

mojo sends

Homeland Security vs. The Rainbow Family

Mass arrests citations/roadblocks now ongoing in Colorado according to IndyMedia.

Update: Be sure to scroll down and read the long entry by starfire on the subject of "rumor control" for the background and the kind of nuance we know our more intelligent readers like to see.

Supreme Court Punks Bush on Hamdi

UPDATED BELOW

Chalk one up for the good guys!

Marty Lederman over at SCOTUSblog has the goods on the Hamdan decision and engages in a little tea leaf reading. In particular he singles out this particularly salient bit discourse by majority opinion author, Justice John Paul Stevens:

[...]the Court held that Common Article 3 of Geneva aplies as a matter of treaty obligation to the conflict against Al Qaeda. That is the HUGE part of today's ruling. The commissions are the least of it. This basically resolves the debate about interrogation techniques, because Common Article 3 provides that detained persons "shall in all circumstances be treated humanely," and that "[t]o this end," certain specified acts "are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever"—including "cruel treatment and torture," and "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." This standard, not limited to the restrictions of the due process clause, is much more restrictive than even the McCain Amendment.

This almost certainly means that the CIA's interrogation regime is unlawful, and indeed, that many techniques the Administation has been using, such as waterboarding and hypothermia (and others) violate the War Crimes Act (because violations of Common Article 3 are deemed war crimes).

If I'm right about this, it's enormously significant.

This could even call into validity the holding of people in Guantanamo altogether.

So let's go to the tape. It was a 5-3 decision, with the dissenters being the gang of three, Sammy the Gavel Alito, Fat Tony Scalia and Clarence Thomas. The Dread Judge Roberts abstained due to the fact that he sat on the District Court of Appeals that wrote the opinion that the Supremes just circular filed. Even had he participated, it would still have been a 5-4 decision.

Now the majority was not entirely unanimous in their reasoning and each of the majority justices also wrote concurring opinions. In legal speak, this means that there are different shadings to the ruling, depending on who's opinion you want to go with. However, there was very little of this "concurs in part, dissents in part" nonsense. They were at least together on the remedy and the basic issues involved. Only Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote an opinion that did not entirely agree with all of Stevens reasoning, although he joined in the majority supporting the decision.

Now let's go to wingnut East Blogistan to see how the denizens of FreeSaltLick are taking the news::

To: pabianice
Impeach the Supreme Court.

31 posted on 06/29/2006 7:16:57 AM PDT by Brilliant
---
To: Constitution Day
From now on we should kill them all where they stand.

29 posted on 06/29/2006 7:16:47 AM PDT by Bikers4Bush
---
To: goodnesswins
Hallelujah!!! Let's chain the moslem bastards together and then push 'em into the ocean!!!

19 posted on 06/29/2006 7:15:49 AM PDT by chadwimc

And there was the most chilling one of all from Freeperville

To: pabianice
How many soldiers does the Supreme Court have?

5 posted on 06/29/2006 7:13:17 AM PDT by CholeraJoe

Yes, isn't that delightful? Threatening violence against the Court. Wonder how many people are going to call out this asshat for making a treasonous or seditious statement against duly appointed officers of the United States?

Who else is grippin' this morning, let see... let's go down the list... well there's the predictably ignorant and violent response from some of the other usual suspects like Anti-Idiotarian Rotweiller wherein Emperor Darth Misha I (wow... adequacy issues much?) says:

[...]The Supreme Whores are in dire need of Intervention by Lynch Mob™.[Read through the comments... they're a laugh riot]

And then there is this outstanding take fromInstahack... seriously, this next bit of text should only be read by trained professionals:

[...]And Marty Lederman at SCOTUSBLOG says the press coverage is missing the biggest part of the story ... Indeed. At the very least, this should serve as a rebuke to those who have been proclaiming that we live in an era of lawless fascism and rubberstamp courts. And that's (another) good reason for Bush not to follow advice from some quarters to disobey the ruling, a la Andrew Jackson.

Ahhh... my eyes... my eyesssss...

Yes, absolutely priceless.

But now on to the real issues... there are some this morning who are actually saying that this might be a net win for the administration. Let's review the bidding. Maximum Leader never really wanted to have any kind of trials for the detainees, but was essentially forced to do so by various court rulings and political pressure from some even in his own party like Lindsay Graham. So the administration sets up the kangaroo court tribunals, which of course violate the very military law they were nominally supposed to be following. So the courts now strike that down, but have also previously held that the U.S. can indefinitely detain these people for the duration of the War®.

So it appears we are still at something of a legal impasse. Now with Stevens writing that Article III of the Geneva Conventions is, for our purposes here, controlling law for the United States in this matter, then that might also overthrow that previous decision in Rasul [?]

Now there are a couple of ways the wingnuts can cope. First, and foremost, Congress can always pass a new law deciding that American forces are no longer specifically bound by the Geneva Conventions, the Senate can go ahead push through a treaty recission, or -- my personally favorite option -- the Preznit can just decide he is not going to be bound by the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions anymore.

We will bring Maximum Leader or the Mouth's reactions later...

Update 1.0: While discussing the issue of whether the "legality" of indefinite dentention was fortified with the good folks at Legal Fiction a very kind person was good enough to answer my basic question on the subject by posting the following:

"Mojo -- per your question, quoting from the opinion of the court, page 72 (VII) "We have assumed ... that Hamdan is a dangerous individual whose beliefs, if acted upon, would cause great harm and even death to innocent civilians, and who would act upon those beliefs if given the opportunity. It bears emphasizing that Hamdan does not challenge, and we do not today address, the Government’s power to detain him for the duration of active hostilities in order to prevent such harm."

This is an interesting turn of phrase. While the Supremes here are reiterating that Hamdan is probably an a-hole who is a potential a threat to Joe Sixpack and Princess Sparklepony Stepford Chick out in RedState, USA, they have not ruled that his dention is unlawful/unconstitutional.

But neither have they ruled his dentention is lawful. They simply punt on that particular question, noting (and here's yer money quote)"Hamdan does not challenge..." Remember your order of precendence in legal thinking from Pierre Schlag's existential crisis regarding the law and law school :

1. Do not confront an ontological question if it can be handled as an epistemic question.
2. Do not confront an epistemic question if it can be handled as a normative question.
3. Do not confront a normative question if it can be handled as a technical question.

That is what has happened here; the Supreme's punted with rule No. 3, the technical question. So we still have this thing out there and it would appear, to me at least, that Stevens drew Hamdan's attorneys a map on how to file the next challenge, this one to overturn indefinite detention on the basis of the Article III being controlling law. Let's see if they take it up...

mojo sends

We Are Not Worthy!

James Wolcott shows us the way! This time, he puts up the numbers on The Big Oxy

Thanks, Wolcott... I need to go find an oxygen bottle now...

mojo sends

Ahhh... My Head!

Well... words really are failing me...

Let me see if I really get what GOP Rep. Ted Poe of Texas is saying here... Even though the Guard at the border is a "publiclity stunt" for the administration, we should at least be thankful that some would-be undocumented aliens aren't crossing the border because they fear being beaten, raped and killed by the National Guard...

Apparently, Mr. Poe seems to think this is something to be encouraged: ""Just think," concluded Poe, "what would happen if we used more Guardsmen on the border front."

Look, will the last American out please hit the lights...

mojo sends