Sure. Fine. That would be a violation of the Geneva Convention, but it’s just a treaty after all….

The Military has said in a memo that got leaked that it thinks that about half of the prisoners down there are innocent. Not liberals, not lawyers, the military thinks that a lot of them are innocent.

Still, who cares. There were at least near terrorists if they got picked up. They also have the same color skin and funny-sounding names.

Line them up against the wall and shoot all of them.

In the end this is going to force those in Congress to choose sides, and in an election year. How much you want to bet the majority will not side with Al-Qaeda?

…

The Nuremburg trials were a high point of the rule of law in western democracies rooting out and punishing evil. Why should we put up with a lower standard?… holding people indefinately without charge and without evidence (other than the word of some warlord that we paid thousands of dollars per head), torture, and kangaroo court - that is all un-American! Never mind that the prisoners are foreigners, is that a reason to be unjust? We are an example to the world… or at least we were in WWII. What a long way we have fallen.

Foreign terroriasts are not entitled to Constitutional protections; they are only entitled to death and Hell!

The constitution holds - whether we are at war or not… and our treaty obligations - and our humanity, for god’s sake, does not take a vacation during war. And if it is war, then these are prisoners of war. If the rule of law truly has been suspended - then that is known as a state of martial law. Are we under martial law?

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military