This just in:

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.

The ruling, a strong rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and international Geneva conventions.
_______________________________________________

This is a WAR.

These people are ISLAMIST TERRORISTS.

These are people who are NOT citizens of the United States.

They are not an Army and they DO NOT represent a NATION.

They do not wear a UNIFORM.

They swear an allegiance to a PHILOSOPHY and perhaps a smattering of religion.

These are people CAPTURED on a BATTLEFIELD in a time of WAR and are being DETAINED.

They are PRISONERS OF WAR.

We must realize: there is no way for an civilized country to conduct a war with another uncivilized country or, moreover, culture and/or philosophy without getting our hands dirty in some fashion.

Otherwise we shall not survive.

The bottom line of this ruling indicates that these people are nothing more than CRIMINALS and therefore they are subject to the same laws as YOU and ME, with all the rights and privileges extant.

Doing The Logical Extension:

Then, does that not mean:

ALL those we capture on the BATTLEFIELD are as a CRIMINAL arrested in any American city.

With all the rights thereto;

And then will not our SOLDIERS be EXPECTED now to ACT and THINK like American POLICEMEN?

And subsequently have to WORRY about being SUED or PROSECUTED in AMERICAN COURTS (and NOT military courts or with the UCMJ applied) as a result of one too many rounds fired, unnecessary wounding, or even “assault with a deadly weapon” for even HAVING BEEN FIRED UPON?

This is absolutely INSANE.

We have taken the first major step to absolutely ENSURE that one or more of the following events WILL occur on sovereign AMERICAN soil:

— The detonation of a dirty bomb;
— The detonation of an actual nuclear device;
— The release of some biological weapon(s);
— The release of some chemical weapon(s);

Not to mention how this will affect our soldiers on foreign soil.

___________________________________________________

The entire culture we are fighting respects but one concept: STRENGTH.

___________________________________________________

We are of sufficient strength and worldly power that the only way to suffer a national defeat is from WITHIN.

And the Islamists KNOW this.

The US Supreme Court has, essentially, sentenced any given number of Americans to DEATH.

I am so disappointed in our country and our system at this moment. I am ashamed.

And frightened for our future.

BZ

___________________________

Additional thoughts an hour later:

Though an incredibly complex decision and I am certain hordes of lawyers are poring over it now, the majority opinion appears to be procedural, thinking that Congress ought to be authorizing military commissions.

Perhaps the next logical step would be to do precisely this.

Absent that, I see nothing more than everyone being simply set free. And that is, on its face, so totally, incredibly wrong.

Will Congress have the mindset to help us triumph and prevail? Knowing, of course, that Congress will be off for the bulk of the summer?

And how much will we have to parse this opinion?

Emblazoned at the top of the DrudgeReport is the photo of a teenager sitting on a table. This is a photograph of the young soldier, in civilian clothing, captured by the Palestinians. Already tanks and soldiers and guns are lined up at Gaza ready to recapture this lone soldier.

Egypt is already marshaling forces along its border with Gaza.

Opening a Constitutional Convention is a very “Big Thing.”

Thomas Jefferson said: ”I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered, and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

Jefferson was right. Amending the Constitution is a serious thing. Article V of the United States Constitution provides that amendments to the Constitution can be proposed in two ways—by Congress or by constitutional convention. After an amendment is proposed by either method, it must be ratified by the State legislatures or State conventions in three-fourths of the States (currently 38) to become a part of our Constitution.

The second method of proposing amendments is triggered upon the applications or petitions of two-thirds of the State legislatures. Under this method, after Congress receives the applications, Article V provides that Congress shall call a constitutional convention to propose constitutional amendments.

As you can clearly see, a very serious process. And one must pick and choose our battles.

What do I mean by this?

When we open a constitutional convention we are setting a precedent: specifically, if we open a CC for flag burning, then why not a CC over rights for pedophiles? The door is opened and I fear for the hordes and masses that will want to walk through.

Would you rather open a CC over flag burning, or over the definition of marriage and/or English as the national language?

Fighting the fight over flag burning impresses me minimally.

I have seen little written on this and suspect I may take some heat over my stance. But in terms of picking one’s fight, I’ll take on the marriage and English issue(s) before I’ll make an issue over flag burning.

Particularly when, per tradition, burning the flag is the approved method of disposing of an old or tattered flag. Shall we possibly open Pandora’s Box over the intent and mental attitude when one burns a flag? Yes, yes, I fully well realize the clear issues of respect vs. lack of respect; but current national law is that burning a flag is a matter of self-expression and free speech. So has the SCOTUS declared in their 1989 and 1990 rulings. I agree with Diane Feinstein when she said that flag burning is an act and not a method of speech — despite the SCOTUS opinions.

WASHINGTON — The Senate yesterday fell a single vote short of approving a constitutional amendment designed to ban flag burning, in the closest vote to date on an issue that Republicans hope will motivate conservative voters to go to the polls this fall.

Sixty-six senators voted in favor — three more than the last time the Senate took up the measure, in 2000, but one short of the two-thirds majority needed for constitutional amendments.

However, in my opinion, creation of an amendment against flag burning minimizes the larger social issues I have addressed above — and opens the door to any number of conehead ideas proffered by the Cultural Changers of our society. There are so many places I do not want us to go under the guise of a constitutional convention.

To me, there are larger and more important issues that likely cannot be addressed in any other fashion than an amendment — such as marriage defined as that union between one man and one woman.

BZ

WASHINGTON –
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer Tue Jun 27, 6:36 PM ET

President Bush took a jog Tuesday with a soldier who lost part of both legs in Iraq, following through on a bedside promise even the president had doubts about at the time.

Despite a slight drizzle, Bush and Staff Sgt. Christian Bagge took a slow jog around a spongy track that circles the White House’s South Lawn. About halfway through their approximately half-mile run, Bush and Bagge paused briefly for reporters.

“He ran the president into the ground, I might add,” Bush said, as the two gripped hands in an emotional, lengthy shake. “But I’m proud of you. I’m proud of your strength, proud of your character.”

The president met the soldier on a New Year’s Day visit to Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, where Bagge had been recuperating from his injuries for months. Bagge, now 23 and a native of Eugene, Ore., was in a convoy hit by roadside bombs a year ago in the remote Iraq desert south of Kirkuk.

Bagge’s left leg was amputated just above the ankle, and his right leg ends just above the knee.
He told Bush during their January visit that he wanted to run with him. Bush was an avid runner who had mostly traded the activity for mountain biking in the last couple of years because of knee problems.

“I looked at him, like, you know, there’s an optimistic person,” Bush said. “It’s an amazing sight for me to be running with a guy who, last time I saw him, was in bed wondering whether or not — I was wondering whether or not he’d ever get out of bed.”

But, the president added, in tribute to the hard work Bagge did to realize this goal, “There was no doubt in his mind that he would.”

“It’s a privilege,” commented Bagge, who had changed in the Oval Office into a special set of prosthetic legs that he uses to jog.

And then the pair took off for the remainder of their run.

________________________

Simply tired of the negativity, I believed it was time to point out: there are positive things in our lives and in our nation.

BZ